The shocking barbarism we saw unfold in Mumbai has stirred free India's soul like little else before. We have, as a nation, since those nearly 60 torturous hours from November 26, been expressing the desire to change things. Change them so never again can a handful of insane killers bring this mighty country to its knees.
Not often does a yen for change grip an entire nation. We would be monumentally stupid to let this opportunity pass. Shocked by the bloodletting in Mumbai, people are willing to make changes at a personal and individual level. In this age of all-consuming selfishness, it is indeed a rare occasion. We could turn this into a
historic moment. But the question is – how?
I know that millions of ordinary Indians like me are looking for direction. We would like someone to lead the way, tell us how we can contribute to the creation of a safer tomorrow. We assume that others know better, that someone out there will put things right. But this inhibition, this hesitancy could lead to the squandering of an
opportunity of a lifetime.
Why don't we all resolve to at least go out and seek ideas, get people talking, exchange thoughts? This doesn't require any sacrifice of family time or career obligations. When we meet friends, let us collectively think of what can be done instead of moaning about how hopeless things are now. Most ideas would probably not be workable, but some most certainly will. Those that have potential should be
supported and circulated till they reach the people who can act on them.
We need to understand that small contributions can make a big difference. Perhaps we could encourage people in our neighbourhoods to try and get to know the police who protect us. Familiarity would slowly open up smoother lines of communication, hopefully enough to get word across faster in case of trouble in future. Resident
associations could easily take up this initiative.
I personally feel we also need to rebuild respect and support for the police and armed forces. They are currently shockingly understaffed, underequipped and – most tragically – lacking people's confidence. Despite the accolades they received after the incidents in Mumbai, we have to admit that people in uniform aren't held in the high esteem they once were. This must change. And that effort has to come from
within the forces as well as the civilian community. So why don't we, for instance, talk of the merits and demerits of conscription? Or community volunteers in the police? This participation doesn't have to be in critical areas. It could be things like paperwork or kitchen duty. The idea being that if everyday people like us get a peek at life on the other side of the law enforcement and defence fences, we might understand them better and give them the respect that is their due.
Putting things right in the political realm might take a little more work. Elections are on in several states and next year comes the big one. This time, when candidates come by to canvass votes, don't just blindly accept the manifesto fliers. Pin them down on issues. Get the neighbourhood together and relentlessly question them on every public issue you can think of. Ask them to clearly spell out where they stand
and what they propose to do. If they seem evasive, they don't deserve our vote.
As for the media - especially television news - they need to learn to exercise some self-restraint. I am not advocating censorship here. But I am sure that our many talking heads realise that in some cases during the Mumbai carnage they just went too far. While we value real-time news, it has to be more objective. I realise emotions were running high through the ordeal, but when reporters and news anchors
on air become shriller by the second, viewers start to get alarmed. Content apart, the tone used through most broadcasts was quite worrying. And I could not believe that reporters, even senior television journalists, were in some cases actually interrupting the firemen and policemen responding to the emergency to ask questions!
One thing each and every one of us has to learn to do is be more patient with security checks. They are, after all, for our own safety. And if in the wake of the Mumbai attacks these checks don't become more stringent, I'd be worried.
If you know people in key positions in government or law enforcement, please ask them how they think ordinary Indians like you and I can make a difference. And do share what they say.
I don't claim to be an expert on anything. I merely wish to stimulate thought and action from Indians like me who are today feeling helpless and wish to contribute in some way. I urge you again to please talk, encourage constructive discussions, and search for workable ideas that can help address the formidable challenge facing India today. Carpédiem, India.
Rupa Chatterjee
December 05, 2008
Top 5 Intelligence Analysis Methods: What Makes A Good Method? (List, Part 2)
Wheaton KristenThere are a number of good analytic methods available. If you are ever at a loss for a method (or just want to see a really good taxonomy of methods) check out the Principles of Forecasting site. Specifically, look at the methodology tree and the selection tree (You can see a screen shot below but you really owe it to yourself to look at the interactive site or, at least, download the PDF).
While I strongly support the International Institute of Forecasters and all of their good work, I have rarely had the kind of data in the real-world intelligence problems on which I have worked that would allow me to be comfortable using many of the methods that they have listed. I'll be honest; these guys have spent a lifetime thinking about forecasting and deriving a taxonomy of methods so I am probably the one who is wrong but the methods I find most useful -- over and over again -- are simply not on their list.What makes for a useful intelligence analysis method? Based primarily on my experience with real-world intelligence problems and with teaching entry-level analysts a wide variety of methods, I think there are four primary factors: Validity, simplicity, flexibility and the method's ability to work with unstructured data.
Validity. There needs to be at least some evidence to suggest that the method actually improves the intelligence estimate and there should not be strong evidence suggesting that the method does not work. Many of today's "generally accepted" methods and multipliers fail to meet this test. Developing and analyzing scenarios and devil's advocacy are two examples. Tetlock took a hard look at one kind of common scenario development method and found it wanting yet this research is almost universally unknown to intelligence analysts. As Steve Rieber has pointed out, there is no real research to support the use of Devil's Advocacy despite its support by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. It is surprising to find that many of today's commonly used intelligence analysis "methods" are, in reality, little more than tribal lore passed down from one generation to another.
Simplicity. All successful intelligence analysts are smart but even when they have PHDs, you find a reluctance to use complex and, more importantly, time consuming methods. Due to the error inherent in the data available to most intelligence professionals, the benefit derived from using these methods simply doesn't appear to most analysts to outweigh their costs. To be "simple" by my definition, a method should be able to be taught in a reasonable amount of time and the analyst should be able to see themselves using the method in real-world situations. Analytic methods that actually help communicate the analysis to the decisionmaker or that help evaluate the intelligence process after the fact get extra credit.
Flexibility. Analysts consistently find themsleves in a wide variety of situations. Sometimes these sistuations are tactical and sometimes they are strategic; sometimes the analyst is a subject matter expert and sometimes they are not. In this post Cold War world, it seems to me that national security analysts are getting dragged from one portfolio to another at an accelerating pace. I remember, for example, when all sorts of Russian analysts were re-branded as newly minted Balkans analysts in the 90's and I suspect that several months ago a number of African or Korean analysts suddenly found themselves on a Georgia-Russia Analytic Team trying to figure out what was likely to happen next in South Ossetia. A really good method should work in all these types of situations and across all the disciplines of intelligence as well.
Works With Unstructured Data. One of the things that distinguishes, in my mind, intelligence work from other analytic work is that intelligence deals primarily in unstructured data. Intelligence data does not come in neat columns and rows on Excel spreadsheets. It comes in a variety of forms and is often wrong, incomplete or even deliberately deceptive. An intelligence method that fails to acknowledge this, that needs "clean" data to get good results, is a less useful method in my mind.
I am sure that there are other factors that one should consider when selecting an analytic method (and, please, put yours in the comments!) but these are the ones that seem most important to me.
Monday: Method #5...
December 04, 2008
MUMBAI TERRORIST STRIKE: THE ANTI-ISRAELI ANGLE
By B.Raman
Ever since the Pakistan-supported insurgency started in Jammu and Kashmir ( J&K) in 1989, Pakistan had been alleging that Israeli counter-terrorism experts had been assisting the Indian security forces in their counter-terrorism operations in J&K. They were also alleging that the Israelis periodically visiting Srinagar were counter-terrorism experts under the guise of tourists.
2.In the last week of June,1991, a group of 40 Israeli tourists had gone to Srinagar. Many of them had just then completed their compulsory military service and had come to India on vacation before resuming their normal vocation. Seven of them were staying in a house boat in the Dal Lake with a Dutch woman.
3.On June 28,1991, some terrorists, believed to be members of the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), attacked the house boat. They locked up the owner of the boat and a servant. The eight tourists were moved to small boats and then taken to a house in Srinagar town.
4.The terrorists interrogated them to find out whether they had any links with the Israeli intelligence. They told them that because they were Jews they would be killed. They allowed the Dutch woman and an Israeli woman to leave. They tied the hands of the men behind their back with ropes. Two of the Israelis managed to remove the rope when the terrorists were not watching. They snatched a rifle from one of the terrorists and killed him. There was an exchange of fire in which one Israeli and one more terrorist were killed. Five Israelis managed to escape and contact the local police. One Israeli was re-captured by the terrorists before he could escape.
5.News of this incident caused an outrage in Israel and in the Jewish community in the US. Kashmiri organizations based in the US urged the JKLF to release the re-captured Israeli as they were afraid that they might lose the support of the American public if any harm came to him. The JKLF released him.
6.At that time, there was no Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in Indian territory--- either in J&K or outside. It infiltrated into J&K only in 1993.
7.There were no more attacks on Israeli nationals, but the Pakistani jihadi organizations continued to criticize the growing Indo-Israeli relations and allege that Israeli counter-terrorism experts were helping India.
8.In addition to visiting Israeli tourists, the LET and Al Qaeda were interested in targeting the Israeli Embassy in New Delhi. Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 terrorist strikes in the US, reportedly told his American interrogators in the Guantanamo Bay detention centre that Al Qaeda had wanted to blow up the Israeli Embassy before 9/11, but could not do so.
9.As mentioned in my book titled “Terrorism---Yesterday, Today & Tomorrow” (www.lancerpublishers.com ), in a travel advisory on its Hebrew language Web site, posted on December 13,2006, Israel's Foreign Ministry had said: "Within the framework of al Qaeda's terror threats in India, there is now a concrete threat focusing on the Goa region where multitudes of visitors, including Israelis, gather ... in late December. Israel's Counter-Terrorism Authority has recommended that Israeli citizens stay away from sites in Goa popular with Westerners and Israelis over the next few weeks."
10.On December 15, 2006, DEBKA, a non-governmental Israeli think-tank, which disseminates information and analyses relating to terrorism, posted the following comments on its web site (www.debka.com): "Information has reached Jerusalem that al Qaeda is in an advanced stage of preparing coordinated attacks on the big, end-of-year seasonal parties held by Western and Israeli tourists in the Indian province. Israeli travelers are advised to cancel their trips to Goa or at least stay away from the big parties. Some 4,000 Israelis have booked flights to India for the winter season. They will be joining the thousands living there. A standing terror warning is still in force for Egyptian Sinai and Turkey."
11. Ever since the terrorist strikes by pro-Al Qaeda Jemmah Islamiya (JI) in the Indonesian tourist resort of Bali in October, 2002, and again in October, 2005, the Indian security agencies in their plans for strengthening physical security have been taking into account the vulnerability of the Indian tourism infrastructure---and particularly in places such as Goa. A greater physical security alert is maintained in places such as Goa, even in the absence of specific information of a planned terrorist strike.
12.There was a greater alert during 2006 following the reported arrest on March 11, 2006, of Tarique Jalal alias Tarique Batlo, a
Tehreek-ul-Mujahideen cadre, from the Margoa railway station. It was reported that one kg of RDX, two Russian-made hand-grenades, two electronic detonators, two cameras and a mobile phone were seized from him. This was followed by the arrest on March 30, 2006, at Jelenabad in Gulbarga, Karnataka, of Shamim Ahmad, a suspected activist of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), who was reportedly a resident of Goa. An AK-47, two hand grenades, a mobile phone, maps of dams and power grid installations in Andhra Pradesh, some audio-video cassettes and printed material in Urdu were reportedly seized from him. These arrests indicated the possibility of the presence of sleeper cells of Pakistani and Kashmiri jihadi terrorist organisations in Goa---not necessarily for organising terrorist strikes in Goa itself, but for providing back-up support to jihadi terrorist strikes in other parts of India.
13.In the beginning of November, 2006, the Goa police reportedly sought reinforcements of para-military forces to enable them to provide effective security during the International Film Festival at Goa and during the holiday season. Their reported threat perceptions particularly related to the LET and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM), both Pakistani jihadi terrorist organisations aligned with Al Qaeda in the International Islamic Front (IIF).
14.Media reports dated November 2, 2006, had quoted Shri D. K. Sawant, Superintendent of Police, North Goa, as saying: "There is no specific threat to IFFI (the international film festival). The police department is taking major precautions as the intelligence agencies have indicated a possible threat of suicide bombing which can target pubs, Army camps and nuclear plants." He was referring to threat possibilities all over India and not specifically in Goa.
15.While addressing the annual conference of the Directors-General of Police organised by the Intelligence Bureau at New Delhi on November 21, 2006, Shri Shivraj Patil, the then Indian Home Minister, who was, inter alia, responsible for counter-terrorism, was reported to have stated that "India's critical infrastructure is under serious threat and it's the coastline that's facing the increased threat perception. The coastal areas are coming under increased threat from groups like the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT). “While he did not refer to possible threats in Goa, subsequent media speculation talked of the possibility of a threat of maritime terrorism directed at the Goa shipyard.
16.The possibility of a terrorist strike in Goa by pro-Al Qaeda elements from Pakistan and India started receiving greater attention since 2006 in the wake of the two arrests mentioned above and the Mumbai blasts of July, 2006. The vulnerabilities of Goa to jihadi strikes arise from its attraction to Israeli and Western tourists and from the location of a shipyard there. Goa has been constantly in the minds of pro-Al Qaeda organisations. In their calculation, it is an attractive place for an act of reprisal terrorism against Israel just as Mombasa was in November, 2002.
17.The fact that the jihadis continue to evince interest in Goa in their thinking, if not planning, for their future terrorist strikes was again highlighted by the reported interrogation of two terrorist suspects arrested by the Karnataka Police in January,2008. These were Riyazuddin Nasir alias Mohammad Ghouse of Hyderabad and Asadullah Abubaker of Hospet in Karnataka, both in their early 20s. Nasir was reported to be a drop-out from an engineering college and Asadullah was a student of the Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences in Hubli. Another student of the same Institute by name Mohammad Asif was also picked up by the Police for interrogation on the basis of the interrogation of Nasir and Asadullah.
18.Interestingly,Nasir and Asadullah were initially picked up by a Head Constable of the Devangere District Police in Karnataka on suspicion of being members of a gang of motor cycle thieves, who, the police suspected, stole motor cycles in Karnataka and Goa and sold them. When they were produced before a court by the Police for seeking police custody for further investigation, Nasir argued his own case for bail. It was stated that the Police were struck by his intelligence, ability to articulate and knowledge of law and procedure. They suspected that he may not be just a motor-cycle thief. Further interrogation by the Police brought out his links with the world of jihad and his training in a training camp of the LET of Pakistan from May, 2006, to January, 2007. There was no indication of any Pakistani links in the case of Asadullah and Asif.
19.Nasir and Asadullah reportedly told the police about their various plans to carry out terrorist strikes against Israeli and Western tourists in Goa and against American and other foreign IT companies in Bangalore. All the three members of the cell arrested by the Karnataka Police are educated Indian Muslims.
20.Thus, since 2006, there have been concerns in the Indian intelligence and security agencies over the possibility of a terrorist strike--- sea-borne as well as land-based---- in Goa mounted by the LET and the Students’ Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) jointly or separately of each other. Since the so-called Indian Mujahideen (IM) started operating in different Indian cities in November,2007, there were concerns of a major terrorist strike in Mumbai by the IM involving the use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs). A message purporting to be from the IM warned of a major terrorist strike directed, inter alia, against the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) of the Mumbai Police, whose chief Hemant Karkare, was among the police officers killed by the terrorists on the night of November 26,2008. The assessment was that they were planning serial explosions similar to those earlier seen in three towns of Uttar Pradesh, Jaipur, Bangalore, Ahmedabad and Delhi directed against civilians and the police of Mumbai. While the Ahmedabad Police viewed the explosions in Ahmedabad on July 26, as carried out by the members of the SIMI under the name of the IM, the Delhi Police viewed the explosions in Delhi on September 13,2008, as jointly carried out by the IM, the SIMI and the LET.
21.According to the “Hindustan Times” ( December 2,2008), the LET’s name as the main plotter of a sea-borne terrorist strike in Mumbai directed against some sea front hotels figured in three technical intelligence reports of the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) based on intercepts reportedly of September 18, September 24 and November 19. These reports were more specific than the earlier interrogation reports about terrorist strikes planned in Goa. However, whereas the reports relating to Goa spoke specifically of Israeli and Western tourists as the targets, the R&AW reports, while indicating that the sea-side hotels in Mumbai preferred by foreign tourists would be the targets, did not speak specifically of Israeli and Western tourists. Nor was there any reference to a planned terrorist strike in the Narriman House, which is also near the sea, where a Jewish religious-cum-cultural centre is located and which has cheap accommodation where Israeli visitors often stay. Among the hotels specifically mentioned by the R&AW was the Taj Palace Hotel, which was attacked by the terrorists on the night of November 26.
22.The presence of the Jewish centre in the Narriman House was not very well known in Mumbai outside Jewish circles. The fact that the terrorists had come to know about it and had included it as one of their principal targets spoke of their extensive local knowledge and of the enquiries that must have been made by them about Israeli/Jewish offices and places of stay near the sea front. They must have made detailed local enquiries either during an advance visit or through accomplices in the local Muslim community. The knowledge, which they seem to have had about the Narriman House, definitely speaks of some local involvement at least in intelligence collection. ." Mark Sofer, the Israeli Ambassador to India, has been quoted as saying: “Out of the thousands of buildings in Mumbai, it was hard to believe that the terrorists had stumbled by chance upon the Jewish center.” They did not target the local Israeli Consulate. This could have been because it was not near the sea front.
23.They wanted to kill as many Jewish people as possible and this might not have been possible in the five-star hotels because most Israeli tourists come on a shoe-string budget and stay in cheap hotels away from the sea front. The Narriman House provided a point where many Jewish people---- locals, Israelis and Jewish visitors from other countries --- congregate. However, since they attacked the place around 10 PM, not many Israelis and other Jewish people were present there. They were able to get only eight Jewish people living or temporarily staying in the premises---- one of them a Mexican and the other Israelis or Americans with the dual nationality of Israel.
24.The terrorists do not appear to have been interested in taking the Jewish people as hostages and using them to achieve any demand. They just wanted to torture and kill all those found in the premises. A rapid reaction raid into the House might have saved at least some lives, if not all the lives. Shortly after getting information about the forcible entry of two terrorists into the Narriman House, a small police party reportedly reached the scene, but it did not apparently have either the numbers or the capability for immediate intervention. One had to wait for the arrival of the specially-trained National Security Guards (NSGs), which is a special intervention force. It arrived the next morning and took nearly 40 hours to enter the premises. By the time it could force its entry into the building it was late. All the eight Jewish people had been killed by the terrorists after torturing them. Only an Indian maid managed to escape with a two-year-old Jewish child. While the Israeli authorities have praised the role of the Indian security forces in dealing with the situation and the co-operation extended by the Government of India, a note of regret over the delayed intervention is evident in some of their remarks.
25.While acknowledging the complexity of ending the attacks across sprawling Mumbai, Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister, told an Israeli TV channel on November 28: "I'm not sure it had to last three days, but that's what happened." Barak told Channel 1 Television that the bodies of two women and three men had been found at the religious-cum-cultural centre.The body of a third woman was found later in the building. Barak added that some of the bodies had been tied up, and that two women had been killed many hours before. "All in all, it was a difficult spectacle," he said.
26.The Defense Minister said that the roots of the attack were in India, but involved militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan . While he did not elaborate, his comments seemed to indicate that the Israeli authorities suspected that it must have been a joint operation of jihadis of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan and not just Pakistan as claimed by India.
27.One could discern notes of criticism in the comments of retired security experts and other private experts too. A former head of Israel's Mossad external intelligence agency, Danny Yatom, said the attacks revealed major failings in Indian intelligence as they "involved dozens of terrorists enjoying the support of numerous sympathisers.""It is vital that the Indian security services draw the necessary lessons," Yatom told a local radio station.
28.The head of Israel's counter-terrorism department, Colonel Nitzan Nurieli, said: "We have to acknowledge that in the Mumbai case our intelligence services did not have adequate advance knowledge; nor did the Indian security services." He urged Israeli tourists to avoid travel to northern India.
29.Ms.Tzipi Livni, the Israeli Foreign Minister said:"There is no doubt, we know, that the targets the terrorists singled out were Jewish, Israeli targets and targets identified with the West, Americans and Britons. Our world is under attack, it doesn't matter whether it happens in India or somewhere else. There are Islamic extremists who don't accept our existence or Western values."
30.DEBKA wrote on December 3: "This marine tactic was one of the al Qaeda scenarios most dreaded by US security agencies between 2002 and 2004. They feared that terrorist bands dropped secretly on a US beach from a mother vessel would sneak into the North America and create mayhem. But in the years since al Qaeda has mostly skirted the United States, this apprehension faded, even though bin Laden's organization owns some 40 merchant vessels. The Mumbai assault revived that dread for US intelligence and anti-terror services. It may take years to uncover all the details of the elaborate Mumbai terrorist operation. In the meantime, Western intelligence and counter-terror agencies are badly bothered by the failure of Indian intelligence and all the world-wide network of terror watchers to pick up a sign that the Mumbai attack was coming. The very stretch of water traveled by the terrorists is patrolled by the American aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt and its strike group. Neither this vessel nor Indian naval intelligence noticed anything amiss. "
31.DEBKA also wrote: “Counter-terror sources were pretty sure that al Qaeda was behind the efficiently-orchestrated assault. They are less sure whether the jihadists, having chosen Mumbai as a target-arena within easy reach of their bases in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Kashmir, are performing a one-off operation, or launching the first of a series. They fear its sequel or sequels may be staged in other parts of the world to coincide with the end-of year holiday season and the inauguration of the new US President, Barack Obama , in January. The terrorists spread out in deadly bands like a cluster bomb. Even before Mumbai, Western intelligence services had picked up Web site chatter indicating that Osama bin Laden was contemplating a spectacular attack to seize the limelight as Obama prepared to settle in the White House. But none of the experts dreamed of a raid on the scale of the Mumbai assault or conceived of its clockwork efficiency. If indeed it is proved to have been the handiwork of al Qaeda, the West faces more spectaculars which may take different forms to astonish the world's counter-terror authorities. A number of innovations were unveiled in Mumbai. The customary suicide bombers and car bombs were abandoned. Instead, the terrorists operated for the first time like a cluster bomb which sends lethal bomblets across a wide area. This was no in-and-out operation. Twenty-four hours later, the terrorists still held the city and hundreds of hostages in a deadly vice."
32.Israeli counter-terrorism experts compared the Mumbai strike to an attempted sea-borne terrorist strike in Tel Aviv in April 2003, when two British Muslims of Pakistani orgin, were allegedly recruited by Al Qaeda, to land by sea in Tel Aviv, seize a large beachside hotel and the nearby US embassy, take hostages and shoot as many as possible. Recruited at London's radical Finsbury Park mosque (like Shoe-bomber Richard Reid) Asif Muhammed Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif were trained in Syria and Gaza Strip.
33.Foreign, including Israeli analysts, seem to have difficulty in accepting the Indian version that only 10 terrorists were involved and that there was no local involvement. Their view is that an operation of this type could not have been carried out by just 10 terrorists and that too without local help.
34. A widespread impression is that in their anxiety to focus on LET involvement, Indian investigators might be missing vital clues about an Al Qaeda hand which would be necessary to prevent a repeat of November 26.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retired ), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Ever since the Pakistan-supported insurgency started in Jammu and Kashmir ( J&K) in 1989, Pakistan had been alleging that Israeli counter-terrorism experts had been assisting the Indian security forces in their counter-terrorism operations in J&K. They were also alleging that the Israelis periodically visiting Srinagar were counter-terrorism experts under the guise of tourists.
2.In the last week of June,1991, a group of 40 Israeli tourists had gone to Srinagar. Many of them had just then completed their compulsory military service and had come to India on vacation before resuming their normal vocation. Seven of them were staying in a house boat in the Dal Lake with a Dutch woman.
3.On June 28,1991, some terrorists, believed to be members of the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), attacked the house boat. They locked up the owner of the boat and a servant. The eight tourists were moved to small boats and then taken to a house in Srinagar town.
4.The terrorists interrogated them to find out whether they had any links with the Israeli intelligence. They told them that because they were Jews they would be killed. They allowed the Dutch woman and an Israeli woman to leave. They tied the hands of the men behind their back with ropes. Two of the Israelis managed to remove the rope when the terrorists were not watching. They snatched a rifle from one of the terrorists and killed him. There was an exchange of fire in which one Israeli and one more terrorist were killed. Five Israelis managed to escape and contact the local police. One Israeli was re-captured by the terrorists before he could escape.
5.News of this incident caused an outrage in Israel and in the Jewish community in the US. Kashmiri organizations based in the US urged the JKLF to release the re-captured Israeli as they were afraid that they might lose the support of the American public if any harm came to him. The JKLF released him.
6.At that time, there was no Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in Indian territory--- either in J&K or outside. It infiltrated into J&K only in 1993.
7.There were no more attacks on Israeli nationals, but the Pakistani jihadi organizations continued to criticize the growing Indo-Israeli relations and allege that Israeli counter-terrorism experts were helping India.
8.In addition to visiting Israeli tourists, the LET and Al Qaeda were interested in targeting the Israeli Embassy in New Delhi. Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 terrorist strikes in the US, reportedly told his American interrogators in the Guantanamo Bay detention centre that Al Qaeda had wanted to blow up the Israeli Embassy before 9/11, but could not do so.
9.As mentioned in my book titled “Terrorism---Yesterday, Today & Tomorrow” (www.lancerpublishers.com ), in a travel advisory on its Hebrew language Web site, posted on December 13,2006, Israel's Foreign Ministry had said: "Within the framework of al Qaeda's terror threats in India, there is now a concrete threat focusing on the Goa region where multitudes of visitors, including Israelis, gather ... in late December. Israel's Counter-Terrorism Authority has recommended that Israeli citizens stay away from sites in Goa popular with Westerners and Israelis over the next few weeks."
10.On December 15, 2006, DEBKA, a non-governmental Israeli think-tank, which disseminates information and analyses relating to terrorism, posted the following comments on its web site (www.debka.com): "Information has reached Jerusalem that al Qaeda is in an advanced stage of preparing coordinated attacks on the big, end-of-year seasonal parties held by Western and Israeli tourists in the Indian province. Israeli travelers are advised to cancel their trips to Goa or at least stay away from the big parties. Some 4,000 Israelis have booked flights to India for the winter season. They will be joining the thousands living there. A standing terror warning is still in force for Egyptian Sinai and Turkey."
11. Ever since the terrorist strikes by pro-Al Qaeda Jemmah Islamiya (JI) in the Indonesian tourist resort of Bali in October, 2002, and again in October, 2005, the Indian security agencies in their plans for strengthening physical security have been taking into account the vulnerability of the Indian tourism infrastructure---and particularly in places such as Goa. A greater physical security alert is maintained in places such as Goa, even in the absence of specific information of a planned terrorist strike.
12.There was a greater alert during 2006 following the reported arrest on March 11, 2006, of Tarique Jalal alias Tarique Batlo, a
Tehreek-ul-Mujahideen cadre, from the Margoa railway station. It was reported that one kg of RDX, two Russian-made hand-grenades, two electronic detonators, two cameras and a mobile phone were seized from him. This was followed by the arrest on March 30, 2006, at Jelenabad in Gulbarga, Karnataka, of Shamim Ahmad, a suspected activist of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), who was reportedly a resident of Goa. An AK-47, two hand grenades, a mobile phone, maps of dams and power grid installations in Andhra Pradesh, some audio-video cassettes and printed material in Urdu were reportedly seized from him. These arrests indicated the possibility of the presence of sleeper cells of Pakistani and Kashmiri jihadi terrorist organisations in Goa---not necessarily for organising terrorist strikes in Goa itself, but for providing back-up support to jihadi terrorist strikes in other parts of India.
13.In the beginning of November, 2006, the Goa police reportedly sought reinforcements of para-military forces to enable them to provide effective security during the International Film Festival at Goa and during the holiday season. Their reported threat perceptions particularly related to the LET and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM), both Pakistani jihadi terrorist organisations aligned with Al Qaeda in the International Islamic Front (IIF).
14.Media reports dated November 2, 2006, had quoted Shri D. K. Sawant, Superintendent of Police, North Goa, as saying: "There is no specific threat to IFFI (the international film festival). The police department is taking major precautions as the intelligence agencies have indicated a possible threat of suicide bombing which can target pubs, Army camps and nuclear plants." He was referring to threat possibilities all over India and not specifically in Goa.
15.While addressing the annual conference of the Directors-General of Police organised by the Intelligence Bureau at New Delhi on November 21, 2006, Shri Shivraj Patil, the then Indian Home Minister, who was, inter alia, responsible for counter-terrorism, was reported to have stated that "India's critical infrastructure is under serious threat and it's the coastline that's facing the increased threat perception. The coastal areas are coming under increased threat from groups like the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT). “While he did not refer to possible threats in Goa, subsequent media speculation talked of the possibility of a threat of maritime terrorism directed at the Goa shipyard.
16.The possibility of a terrorist strike in Goa by pro-Al Qaeda elements from Pakistan and India started receiving greater attention since 2006 in the wake of the two arrests mentioned above and the Mumbai blasts of July, 2006. The vulnerabilities of Goa to jihadi strikes arise from its attraction to Israeli and Western tourists and from the location of a shipyard there. Goa has been constantly in the minds of pro-Al Qaeda organisations. In their calculation, it is an attractive place for an act of reprisal terrorism against Israel just as Mombasa was in November, 2002.
17.The fact that the jihadis continue to evince interest in Goa in their thinking, if not planning, for their future terrorist strikes was again highlighted by the reported interrogation of two terrorist suspects arrested by the Karnataka Police in January,2008. These were Riyazuddin Nasir alias Mohammad Ghouse of Hyderabad and Asadullah Abubaker of Hospet in Karnataka, both in their early 20s. Nasir was reported to be a drop-out from an engineering college and Asadullah was a student of the Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences in Hubli. Another student of the same Institute by name Mohammad Asif was also picked up by the Police for interrogation on the basis of the interrogation of Nasir and Asadullah.
18.Interestingly,Nasir and Asadullah were initially picked up by a Head Constable of the Devangere District Police in Karnataka on suspicion of being members of a gang of motor cycle thieves, who, the police suspected, stole motor cycles in Karnataka and Goa and sold them. When they were produced before a court by the Police for seeking police custody for further investigation, Nasir argued his own case for bail. It was stated that the Police were struck by his intelligence, ability to articulate and knowledge of law and procedure. They suspected that he may not be just a motor-cycle thief. Further interrogation by the Police brought out his links with the world of jihad and his training in a training camp of the LET of Pakistan from May, 2006, to January, 2007. There was no indication of any Pakistani links in the case of Asadullah and Asif.
19.Nasir and Asadullah reportedly told the police about their various plans to carry out terrorist strikes against Israeli and Western tourists in Goa and against American and other foreign IT companies in Bangalore. All the three members of the cell arrested by the Karnataka Police are educated Indian Muslims.
20.Thus, since 2006, there have been concerns in the Indian intelligence and security agencies over the possibility of a terrorist strike--- sea-borne as well as land-based---- in Goa mounted by the LET and the Students’ Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) jointly or separately of each other. Since the so-called Indian Mujahideen (IM) started operating in different Indian cities in November,2007, there were concerns of a major terrorist strike in Mumbai by the IM involving the use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs). A message purporting to be from the IM warned of a major terrorist strike directed, inter alia, against the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) of the Mumbai Police, whose chief Hemant Karkare, was among the police officers killed by the terrorists on the night of November 26,2008. The assessment was that they were planning serial explosions similar to those earlier seen in three towns of Uttar Pradesh, Jaipur, Bangalore, Ahmedabad and Delhi directed against civilians and the police of Mumbai. While the Ahmedabad Police viewed the explosions in Ahmedabad on July 26, as carried out by the members of the SIMI under the name of the IM, the Delhi Police viewed the explosions in Delhi on September 13,2008, as jointly carried out by the IM, the SIMI and the LET.
21.According to the “Hindustan Times” ( December 2,2008), the LET’s name as the main plotter of a sea-borne terrorist strike in Mumbai directed against some sea front hotels figured in three technical intelligence reports of the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) based on intercepts reportedly of September 18, September 24 and November 19. These reports were more specific than the earlier interrogation reports about terrorist strikes planned in Goa. However, whereas the reports relating to Goa spoke specifically of Israeli and Western tourists as the targets, the R&AW reports, while indicating that the sea-side hotels in Mumbai preferred by foreign tourists would be the targets, did not speak specifically of Israeli and Western tourists. Nor was there any reference to a planned terrorist strike in the Narriman House, which is also near the sea, where a Jewish religious-cum-cultural centre is located and which has cheap accommodation where Israeli visitors often stay. Among the hotels specifically mentioned by the R&AW was the Taj Palace Hotel, which was attacked by the terrorists on the night of November 26.
22.The presence of the Jewish centre in the Narriman House was not very well known in Mumbai outside Jewish circles. The fact that the terrorists had come to know about it and had included it as one of their principal targets spoke of their extensive local knowledge and of the enquiries that must have been made by them about Israeli/Jewish offices and places of stay near the sea front. They must have made detailed local enquiries either during an advance visit or through accomplices in the local Muslim community. The knowledge, which they seem to have had about the Narriman House, definitely speaks of some local involvement at least in intelligence collection. ." Mark Sofer, the Israeli Ambassador to India, has been quoted as saying: “Out of the thousands of buildings in Mumbai, it was hard to believe that the terrorists had stumbled by chance upon the Jewish center.” They did not target the local Israeli Consulate. This could have been because it was not near the sea front.
23.They wanted to kill as many Jewish people as possible and this might not have been possible in the five-star hotels because most Israeli tourists come on a shoe-string budget and stay in cheap hotels away from the sea front. The Narriman House provided a point where many Jewish people---- locals, Israelis and Jewish visitors from other countries --- congregate. However, since they attacked the place around 10 PM, not many Israelis and other Jewish people were present there. They were able to get only eight Jewish people living or temporarily staying in the premises---- one of them a Mexican and the other Israelis or Americans with the dual nationality of Israel.
24.The terrorists do not appear to have been interested in taking the Jewish people as hostages and using them to achieve any demand. They just wanted to torture and kill all those found in the premises. A rapid reaction raid into the House might have saved at least some lives, if not all the lives. Shortly after getting information about the forcible entry of two terrorists into the Narriman House, a small police party reportedly reached the scene, but it did not apparently have either the numbers or the capability for immediate intervention. One had to wait for the arrival of the specially-trained National Security Guards (NSGs), which is a special intervention force. It arrived the next morning and took nearly 40 hours to enter the premises. By the time it could force its entry into the building it was late. All the eight Jewish people had been killed by the terrorists after torturing them. Only an Indian maid managed to escape with a two-year-old Jewish child. While the Israeli authorities have praised the role of the Indian security forces in dealing with the situation and the co-operation extended by the Government of India, a note of regret over the delayed intervention is evident in some of their remarks.
25.While acknowledging the complexity of ending the attacks across sprawling Mumbai, Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister, told an Israeli TV channel on November 28: "I'm not sure it had to last three days, but that's what happened." Barak told Channel 1 Television that the bodies of two women and three men had been found at the religious-cum-cultural centre.The body of a third woman was found later in the building. Barak added that some of the bodies had been tied up, and that two women had been killed many hours before. "All in all, it was a difficult spectacle," he said.
26.The Defense Minister said that the roots of the attack were in India, but involved militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan . While he did not elaborate, his comments seemed to indicate that the Israeli authorities suspected that it must have been a joint operation of jihadis of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan and not just Pakistan as claimed by India.
27.One could discern notes of criticism in the comments of retired security experts and other private experts too. A former head of Israel's Mossad external intelligence agency, Danny Yatom, said the attacks revealed major failings in Indian intelligence as they "involved dozens of terrorists enjoying the support of numerous sympathisers.""It is vital that the Indian security services draw the necessary lessons," Yatom told a local radio station.
28.The head of Israel's counter-terrorism department, Colonel Nitzan Nurieli, said: "We have to acknowledge that in the Mumbai case our intelligence services did not have adequate advance knowledge; nor did the Indian security services." He urged Israeli tourists to avoid travel to northern India.
29.Ms.Tzipi Livni, the Israeli Foreign Minister said:"There is no doubt, we know, that the targets the terrorists singled out were Jewish, Israeli targets and targets identified with the West, Americans and Britons. Our world is under attack, it doesn't matter whether it happens in India or somewhere else. There are Islamic extremists who don't accept our existence or Western values."
30.DEBKA wrote on December 3: "This marine tactic was one of the al Qaeda scenarios most dreaded by US security agencies between 2002 and 2004. They feared that terrorist bands dropped secretly on a US beach from a mother vessel would sneak into the North America and create mayhem. But in the years since al Qaeda has mostly skirted the United States, this apprehension faded, even though bin Laden's organization owns some 40 merchant vessels. The Mumbai assault revived that dread for US intelligence and anti-terror services. It may take years to uncover all the details of the elaborate Mumbai terrorist operation. In the meantime, Western intelligence and counter-terror agencies are badly bothered by the failure of Indian intelligence and all the world-wide network of terror watchers to pick up a sign that the Mumbai attack was coming. The very stretch of water traveled by the terrorists is patrolled by the American aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt and its strike group. Neither this vessel nor Indian naval intelligence noticed anything amiss. "
31.DEBKA also wrote: “Counter-terror sources were pretty sure that al Qaeda was behind the efficiently-orchestrated assault. They are less sure whether the jihadists, having chosen Mumbai as a target-arena within easy reach of their bases in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Kashmir, are performing a one-off operation, or launching the first of a series. They fear its sequel or sequels may be staged in other parts of the world to coincide with the end-of year holiday season and the inauguration of the new US President, Barack Obama , in January. The terrorists spread out in deadly bands like a cluster bomb. Even before Mumbai, Western intelligence services had picked up Web site chatter indicating that Osama bin Laden was contemplating a spectacular attack to seize the limelight as Obama prepared to settle in the White House. But none of the experts dreamed of a raid on the scale of the Mumbai assault or conceived of its clockwork efficiency. If indeed it is proved to have been the handiwork of al Qaeda, the West faces more spectaculars which may take different forms to astonish the world's counter-terror authorities. A number of innovations were unveiled in Mumbai. The customary suicide bombers and car bombs were abandoned. Instead, the terrorists operated for the first time like a cluster bomb which sends lethal bomblets across a wide area. This was no in-and-out operation. Twenty-four hours later, the terrorists still held the city and hundreds of hostages in a deadly vice."
32.Israeli counter-terrorism experts compared the Mumbai strike to an attempted sea-borne terrorist strike in Tel Aviv in April 2003, when two British Muslims of Pakistani orgin, were allegedly recruited by Al Qaeda, to land by sea in Tel Aviv, seize a large beachside hotel and the nearby US embassy, take hostages and shoot as many as possible. Recruited at London's radical Finsbury Park mosque (like Shoe-bomber Richard Reid) Asif Muhammed Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif were trained in Syria and Gaza Strip.
33.Foreign, including Israeli analysts, seem to have difficulty in accepting the Indian version that only 10 terrorists were involved and that there was no local involvement. Their view is that an operation of this type could not have been carried out by just 10 terrorists and that too without local help.
34. A widespread impression is that in their anxiety to focus on LET involvement, Indian investigators might be missing vital clues about an Al Qaeda hand which would be necessary to prevent a repeat of November 26.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retired ), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
"The Present Monetary System Is The Disease"
December 4, 2008 (LPAC)--BFM.ru, the new Internet portal of the Russian economics radio station Business FM, today published an interview with U.S. economist Lyndon LaRouche, under the headline "The Present Monetary System Is the Disease."
Correspondent Natalya Bokareva, to whose written questions LaRouche replied on Nov. 27, introduced the interview: "The only way to save the world economy is to return to Bretton Woods. The cosmetic changes, proposed by the G-8 and the G-20, will not save the world. The American economist Lyndon LaRouche presents this viewpoint in an interview with BFM.ru."
Illustrated by a photo of LaRouche addressing an audience in Washington on Nov. 18, the BFM.ru publication goes on to provide partially correct biographical information on LaRouche, including that he was author of the Strategic Defense Initiative, and that he was jailed, but was released ahead of time after advocacy on his behalf by numerous influentials. The introduction also notes that as an "anti-globalist," LaRouche calls for returning to "the original American System," adding that "this is partially explained by the fact that LaRouche's ancestors landed on American shores from the Mayflower, thus originally belonging to the American establishment."
Today, BFM.ru stresses, "LaRouche calls for the world to return to the economic prescriptions of Roosevelt, and to a credit system, rather than a monetarist global financial system." (The day before this publication appeared, Russian aluminum industry magnate Oleg Deripaska issued a nationally publicized call to save Russian industry by following the model of FDR's New Deal.) Then follow the interview questions and answers, as shown below in English. They may be viewed in Russian at www.bfm.ru/news/2008/12/03/larush.html.
In the discussion area on BFM.ru, readers have noted the importance of studying LaRouche's other writings, including his economic and strategic forecasts from before 2001.
BFM.ru: Many officials keep repeating that the global financial system needs reforming. In your opinion, what will this new order mean-- creating some new regulatory institutions or reorganising the existing ones (the IMF, the World Bank) to change their core profile and activities? What is possible and necessary to implement in the near future?
LaRouche: All proposed reforms which were situated within the context of the present monetary system would fail disastrously. It is the present monetary system itself which is the disease. It can not be cured; it can only be replaced. Any attempt to reform the present system would be a quick step toward a great disaster.
What is required is the replacement of the existing monetary system by a credit-system modeled upon the intention of the Federal Constitution of the U.S.A., as President Franklin D. Roosevelt had intended such a reform in his presentation of what he defined as a Bretton Woods System.
The confusion on this issue arises because the IMF installed by the British and Truman's USA was a monetarist system, not a credit system. The source of the potentially fatal confusion among most governments on this matter is a result of the fact that President Franklin Roosevelt was anti-colonialist, and intended his IMF reform to eradicate colonialism and similar abuses. Truman, a right-winger allied to Churchill, used the opportunity created by President Roosevelt's death to defend previously established British imperialist and other colonial arrangements. The British empire now rules the world, at least temporarily.
With the floating of the U.S. dollar, by President Nixon, in 1971, the dollar ceased to be a sovereign currency, and was degraded, step by step, to becoming a plaything of an Anglo-Dutch Liberal monetarist system. It is that now hopelessly bankrupted, monetarist system, itself, which has entered the phase of terminal collapse. All nations which continue to seek reforms within the existing monetary system will simply disintegrate at some early time, perhaps as early as months away.
Russia would be a first choice of a possible initiator of such a reform, were the U.S.A. to join Russia in such an action. Then, China, which desperately needs such a solution, and India, whose situation is somewhat less critical at the moment, would form a group of four which would be the nucleus, around which to rally other nations as members. Such an action would be almost certainly successful; no alternative to that is visible.
BFM.ru: In your opinion, how relevant is the need for stricter oversight over global corporations and, particularly, for control over speculative capital movements?
LaRouche: Ruthless enforcement against freedom for speculative forms of financial-capital movements is necessary for any nation which intends to outlive the now rapidly approaching general breakdown-collapse of all existing monetarist systems.
Money has no intrinsic value. That is why all conventional economists have been complete failures in their attempts at long-range statistical-economic forecasting. There is no way that money values could come kinematically into functional correspondence with human values. Forecasting, in which I have the best record of anyone so engaged, must be approached in terms of physical-capital and science-technological factors, not statistical theories.
Money-values must be regulated within reasonable ranges of estimates; such systems are called protectionist systems. People who think only in terms of buying and selling today, are ignorant of the decisive role of long-term capital improvements in production and basic economic infrastructure.
Not only must protectionist measures defend long-term capital requirements, but they must include increasingly high rates of technological improvements in effective productivity of physical capital, as measured per capita and per square kilometer. These capital formations involve spans of a quarter- to a half-century and longer. The ensuring of needed long-term physical capital formation and of increase of the energy-flux-density of power per capita and per-square kilometer of territory, must be built into the policy-making process. For example, the increase of the energy-flux density of power sources (which means nuclear-fission and nuclear-fusion densities) is indispensable for meeting the conditions of life required for the present level of population of the planet. Without a fixed-exchange-rate system, no long-term success of any modern economy could be possible.
BFM.ru: The G7 today is a kind of a representative club which is not a decision-making body. In your opinion, is it necessary to expand the membership in this elite club and change its principles of functioning? Should this include creating a new global regulatory body competent in making decisions which are obligatory for its members?
LaRouche: Forget the G-7 and kindred arrangements. They are only coffins within which the memory of disintegrated national systems who join them will soon be buried. It is necessary to create a new system. The only workable first step would be to create a nucleus for a new world credit-system (not a monetary system) of the form which President Franklin Roosevelt had actually intended. It must be a fixed-exchange-rate credit-system, not a monetary system.
BFM.ru: Currently, the ideas of reorganising the global financial system are promoted by different officials in different countries. Can you see a political leader authoritative and powerful enough to grasp and unify all the views and drive this revolution?
LaRouche: Presently, all governments are behaving very foolishly on these issues. One must hope that sheer terror will improve their intentions. The terror will be a runaway hyperinflation which will comparable, on a world-wide scale, to what Germany experienced during October-November 1923. That development is already under way, globally, at this moment. The banking systems of the world are already accelerating their inflation toward early breakdown prospects. I present the design for the remedy. If my design is adopted, civilization will survive the months ahead. If not, we must hope some nations of the distant future after a prolonged, planet-wide, new dark age will be wiser than the present
Correspondent Natalya Bokareva, to whose written questions LaRouche replied on Nov. 27, introduced the interview: "The only way to save the world economy is to return to Bretton Woods. The cosmetic changes, proposed by the G-8 and the G-20, will not save the world. The American economist Lyndon LaRouche presents this viewpoint in an interview with BFM.ru."
Illustrated by a photo of LaRouche addressing an audience in Washington on Nov. 18, the BFM.ru publication goes on to provide partially correct biographical information on LaRouche, including that he was author of the Strategic Defense Initiative, and that he was jailed, but was released ahead of time after advocacy on his behalf by numerous influentials. The introduction also notes that as an "anti-globalist," LaRouche calls for returning to "the original American System," adding that "this is partially explained by the fact that LaRouche's ancestors landed on American shores from the Mayflower, thus originally belonging to the American establishment."
Today, BFM.ru stresses, "LaRouche calls for the world to return to the economic prescriptions of Roosevelt, and to a credit system, rather than a monetarist global financial system." (The day before this publication appeared, Russian aluminum industry magnate Oleg Deripaska issued a nationally publicized call to save Russian industry by following the model of FDR's New Deal.) Then follow the interview questions and answers, as shown below in English. They may be viewed in Russian at www.bfm.ru/news/2008/12/03/larush.html.
In the discussion area on BFM.ru, readers have noted the importance of studying LaRouche's other writings, including his economic and strategic forecasts from before 2001.
BFM.ru: Many officials keep repeating that the global financial system needs reforming. In your opinion, what will this new order mean-- creating some new regulatory institutions or reorganising the existing ones (the IMF, the World Bank) to change their core profile and activities? What is possible and necessary to implement in the near future?
LaRouche: All proposed reforms which were situated within the context of the present monetary system would fail disastrously. It is the present monetary system itself which is the disease. It can not be cured; it can only be replaced. Any attempt to reform the present system would be a quick step toward a great disaster.
What is required is the replacement of the existing monetary system by a credit-system modeled upon the intention of the Federal Constitution of the U.S.A., as President Franklin D. Roosevelt had intended such a reform in his presentation of what he defined as a Bretton Woods System.
The confusion on this issue arises because the IMF installed by the British and Truman's USA was a monetarist system, not a credit system. The source of the potentially fatal confusion among most governments on this matter is a result of the fact that President Franklin Roosevelt was anti-colonialist, and intended his IMF reform to eradicate colonialism and similar abuses. Truman, a right-winger allied to Churchill, used the opportunity created by President Roosevelt's death to defend previously established British imperialist and other colonial arrangements. The British empire now rules the world, at least temporarily.
With the floating of the U.S. dollar, by President Nixon, in 1971, the dollar ceased to be a sovereign currency, and was degraded, step by step, to becoming a plaything of an Anglo-Dutch Liberal monetarist system. It is that now hopelessly bankrupted, monetarist system, itself, which has entered the phase of terminal collapse. All nations which continue to seek reforms within the existing monetary system will simply disintegrate at some early time, perhaps as early as months away.
Russia would be a first choice of a possible initiator of such a reform, were the U.S.A. to join Russia in such an action. Then, China, which desperately needs such a solution, and India, whose situation is somewhat less critical at the moment, would form a group of four which would be the nucleus, around which to rally other nations as members. Such an action would be almost certainly successful; no alternative to that is visible.
BFM.ru: In your opinion, how relevant is the need for stricter oversight over global corporations and, particularly, for control over speculative capital movements?
LaRouche: Ruthless enforcement against freedom for speculative forms of financial-capital movements is necessary for any nation which intends to outlive the now rapidly approaching general breakdown-collapse of all existing monetarist systems.
Money has no intrinsic value. That is why all conventional economists have been complete failures in their attempts at long-range statistical-economic forecasting. There is no way that money values could come kinematically into functional correspondence with human values. Forecasting, in which I have the best record of anyone so engaged, must be approached in terms of physical-capital and science-technological factors, not statistical theories.
Money-values must be regulated within reasonable ranges of estimates; such systems are called protectionist systems. People who think only in terms of buying and selling today, are ignorant of the decisive role of long-term capital improvements in production and basic economic infrastructure.
Not only must protectionist measures defend long-term capital requirements, but they must include increasingly high rates of technological improvements in effective productivity of physical capital, as measured per capita and per square kilometer. These capital formations involve spans of a quarter- to a half-century and longer. The ensuring of needed long-term physical capital formation and of increase of the energy-flux-density of power per capita and per-square kilometer of territory, must be built into the policy-making process. For example, the increase of the energy-flux density of power sources (which means nuclear-fission and nuclear-fusion densities) is indispensable for meeting the conditions of life required for the present level of population of the planet. Without a fixed-exchange-rate system, no long-term success of any modern economy could be possible.
BFM.ru: The G7 today is a kind of a representative club which is not a decision-making body. In your opinion, is it necessary to expand the membership in this elite club and change its principles of functioning? Should this include creating a new global regulatory body competent in making decisions which are obligatory for its members?
LaRouche: Forget the G-7 and kindred arrangements. They are only coffins within which the memory of disintegrated national systems who join them will soon be buried. It is necessary to create a new system. The only workable first step would be to create a nucleus for a new world credit-system (not a monetary system) of the form which President Franklin Roosevelt had actually intended. It must be a fixed-exchange-rate credit-system, not a monetary system.
BFM.ru: Currently, the ideas of reorganising the global financial system are promoted by different officials in different countries. Can you see a political leader authoritative and powerful enough to grasp and unify all the views and drive this revolution?
LaRouche: Presently, all governments are behaving very foolishly on these issues. One must hope that sheer terror will improve their intentions. The terror will be a runaway hyperinflation which will comparable, on a world-wide scale, to what Germany experienced during October-November 1923. That development is already under way, globally, at this moment. The banking systems of the world are already accelerating their inflation toward early breakdown prospects. I present the design for the remedy. If my design is adopted, civilization will survive the months ahead. If not, we must hope some nations of the distant future after a prolonged, planet-wide, new dark age will be wiser than the present
Top 5 Intelligence Analysis Methods
Source : SourcesAndMethods
Kristan J. Wheaton
(Note: I was recently asked to name and describe my top 5 intelligence analysis methods. As I began to think about it, what seemed like a fairly straightforward question morphed into what I could only think of a series of blog posts. So, here they are...)
Considerable emphasis has been put on improving the methods of intelligence analysis over the last six years. The 9/11 Report alluded to the need for it, the WMD Commission addressed it more directly and the DNI recently highlighted the continued requirement for advanced analytic techniques in its Vision: 2015 document.Still, the intuitive method (also known as "read a bunch of stuff, think about it for a bit and then write something") remains the most popular method for producing intelligence analysis despite this method's well known tendency to permit a wide range of cognitive and systemic biases to corrupt the analytic product (see Heuer and Tetlock for excellent overviews of these problems).Beyond the intuitive method (and the interesting defenses of it offered by books such as Blink and Gut Feelings), what, then, are the best methods for conducting intelligence analysis? Given the wide range of intelligence analysis problems (tactical, operational, strategic) and the large number of disciplines using intelligence analysis to support decisionmaking (national security, law enforcement and business) is there any chance that I can identify the five best methods?My answer is, obviously, "Yes!" but before the fighting begins (and there will be fighting...), I intend to give myself a chance of convincing you by defining not only what I mean when I say "method", but also what makes for a good one.What Is An Intelligence Analysis Method?The word "method" is often used casually by analysts. When used this way, processes as different as brainstorming and Analysis Of Competing Hypotheses can both be seen as "methods" or ways to improve thinking. While such an informal definition might work at a cocktail party, it is not very helpful for professional purposes. "Method", in my opinion, should be reserved for processes that produce or substantially help the analyst produce estimative results.Why?It is simple, really. Estimative results are what decisionmakers want most from intelligence. It is nice to have a good description of an item of interest or a decent explanation of why something did or did not happen. Both provide useful context for the decisionmaker, but nothing beats a good, solid estimate of what the enemy or competitor or criminal is likely to do next. Defining method as something that produces estimative results means that I am connecting the most common term with the most desired result.All the processes that help the analyst think but do not, by themselves, produce estimative results (such as brainstorming) I call "analytic multipliers". I get this from my military background, I suppose, where there are elements of combat power, such as armor or artillery, and combat multipliers, such as morale.Analytic tools, then, are particular pieces of software, etc. that operationalize the method or the multiplier (or in some cases multiple methods and multipliers) in a particular way. For example, ACH is a method but the PARC ACH 2.0.3 software is a tool that allows the analyst to more easily do ACH. I find these distinctions very useful in discussing the analytic process with students. If everything is a method -- if free association exercises are treated, linguistically, the same as multi-attribute utility analysis, for example -- then nothing, in the mind of the student, is a method. Clearly, not every process falls neatly into the method or multiplier camp (what is SWOT, for example, under these definitions?) but some generally agreed upon set of words to capture the large and easily recognizable differences between things such as ACH and brainstorming seems useful.Tomorrow: What makes a good method?
American Intelligence Takes Some Hints from Shell
Source: IntelligenceOnline.com
The National Intelligence Council called on a wide network of futurologists to draft its latest forecasts. Among them were a good number of former strategy and planning aides from the RoyalDutch/Shell oil company.
The central forecasting unit of the American intelligence community, the National Intelligence Council (NIC) has just published Global Trends 2025 - A Transformed World, a report that seeks to identify the main economic, technological, demographic and diplomatic trends that will shape the world in the 15 years to come. Numerous private consultants and experts were roped in to prepare the report (see graph below). Among them were many who had worked for forecasting units of RoyalDutch/Shell. To be sure, the National Intelligence Council selected the model used by the oil company, the “Intuitive Logics School” which draws on the conclusions of a group of experts rather than employing software that explores various contingencies. Shell used the method in the 1970s under the supervision of Peter Schwartz. He has since gone on to found Global Business Network, a consultancy that was also asked to contribute to the Global Trends 2025 report. Variations of the methods used by Shell were also deployed by SRI International, which previously employed a number of consultants who worked on the technical section of the NIC report, and by the consultancy Decision Strategies International.
The National Intelligence Council called on a wide network of futurologists to draft its latest forecasts. Among them were a good number of former strategy and planning aides from the RoyalDutch/Shell oil company.
The central forecasting unit of the American intelligence community, the National Intelligence Council (NIC) has just published Global Trends 2025 - A Transformed World, a report that seeks to identify the main economic, technological, demographic and diplomatic trends that will shape the world in the 15 years to come. Numerous private consultants and experts were roped in to prepare the report (see graph below). Among them were many who had worked for forecasting units of RoyalDutch/Shell. To be sure, the National Intelligence Council selected the model used by the oil company, the “Intuitive Logics School” which draws on the conclusions of a group of experts rather than employing software that explores various contingencies. Shell used the method in the 1970s under the supervision of Peter Schwartz. He has since gone on to found Global Business Network, a consultancy that was also asked to contribute to the Global Trends 2025 report. Variations of the methods used by Shell were also deployed by SRI International, which previously employed a number of consultants who worked on the technical section of the NIC report, and by the consultancy Decision Strategies International.
Dawood and Black Globalization
http://naxaliterage.com/?p=171
“What’s the point of asking Islamabad to hand over Dawood when we’re not doing anything to destroy his empire in Mumbai and other places in India?” a senior official asked.
While the Naxal insurgency co-opts the most participants in the Indian black economy, Dawood Ibrahim is in himself succinctly described as the number one participant. A scion of the smuggling era, (occurred during India’s buildup to opening up its economy) he now operates with impunity out of Pakistan, parties with Bollywood stars, and is the goto guy for anyone seeking to attack targets in urban India.
Unfortunately, the Pakistani state can’t take him out without incurring the wrath of Dawood’s network, which is extensively linked to every major terror outfit in the region and has played a prominant role in major attacks. In short, Dawood is to black globalization what AQ Khan was to nuclear proliferation (also a Pakistani resident).
This is the same challenge Pakistan faces across the board, especially with regards to LeT- the functioning state has been essentially slaved to its various nonstate elements. This is why Zardari has been forced to act as the mouthpiece for both his functioning state and the nonfunctioning areas that killed his wife - any other action results in his immediate failure. Musharraf faced the same dynamic.
One approach would be to simply recognize the failure of the Pakistani state and ask for support. Unfortunately, India is struggling with its internal security systems while the United States is quickly running into the headwinds of global economic crisis.
“What’s the point of asking Islamabad to hand over Dawood when we’re not doing anything to destroy his empire in Mumbai and other places in India?” a senior official asked.
While the Naxal insurgency co-opts the most participants in the Indian black economy, Dawood Ibrahim is in himself succinctly described as the number one participant. A scion of the smuggling era, (occurred during India’s buildup to opening up its economy) he now operates with impunity out of Pakistan, parties with Bollywood stars, and is the goto guy for anyone seeking to attack targets in urban India.
Unfortunately, the Pakistani state can’t take him out without incurring the wrath of Dawood’s network, which is extensively linked to every major terror outfit in the region and has played a prominant role in major attacks. In short, Dawood is to black globalization what AQ Khan was to nuclear proliferation (also a Pakistani resident).
This is the same challenge Pakistan faces across the board, especially with regards to LeT- the functioning state has been essentially slaved to its various nonstate elements. This is why Zardari has been forced to act as the mouthpiece for both his functioning state and the nonfunctioning areas that killed his wife - any other action results in his immediate failure. Musharraf faced the same dynamic.
One approach would be to simply recognize the failure of the Pakistani state and ask for support. Unfortunately, India is struggling with its internal security systems while the United States is quickly running into the headwinds of global economic crisis.
December 03, 2008
Accountability Of Intelligence Agencies
By B. Raman
The Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) have mounted a damage-control exercise by sharing with senior journalists details of technical intelligence (TECHINT) collected by them, which clearly indicated that the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), the Pakistani terrorist organisation, which is a member of Osama bin Laden's International Islamic Front (IIF) For Jihad Against the Crusaders and the Jewish People, was planning to carry out sea-borne terrorist strikes against hotels on Mumbai's coast, one of the hotels being the Taj Mahal hotel, which was actually attacked and occupied by some terrorists on the night of November 26, 2008. This intelligence was disseminated by them to those responsible for physical security. It seems to be the contention of the IB and the R&AW that what happened in Mumbai was a serious instance of physical security failure and failure to act on available intelligence and not an instance of intelligence failure.
2. Other independent reports indicate that the reports were acted upon by the Mumbai Police and the security authorities of the Taj Mahal Hotel. It was not as if they ignored them. The Mumbai Police alerted the hotels mentioned in the R&AW report and advised them on the need to strengthen security. The Mumbai Police also set up a security barrier at a point near the sea where , in their assessment, clandestine landings might take place.
3. The two specific reports of the R&AW based on intercepts were disseminated in September. There was no follow-up report for nearly five weeks, either from the IB or the R&AW. As a result, the Mumbai Police and hotels downgraded the security alert. The Taj Mahal Hotel removed a security barrier, which they had erected, and the Mumbai Police removed the security barrier which they had set up to prevent clandestine landings. The terrorists from Pakistan seem to have landed at this very point, where the Mumbai Police had erected the security barrier on the receipt of the alert from the R&AW.
4. The R&AW and the IB have their offices in Mumbai headed by senior officers to interact closely with the local police and the Armed Forces units. All of them are members of special co-ordination committees. How come the IB and the R&AW officers did not come to know that the security alert had been downgraded following the non-receipt of any follow-up reports from the R&AW? Did the R&AW immediately advise the Mumbai Police, the Navy and the hotel authorities that the alert should be continued till they receive information that the LET has abandoned its plans?
5. While the intercepts of September speak well of the interception capability of the R&AW, it does not necessarily speak well of its capability for analysis, assessment and follow-up action. Many questions are relevant in this regard: In what form did it report the intelligence? Did it tone it down while reporting the intercepts in a paraphrased form? Did it tell the persons to whom it sent the two reports of September that the intelligence was based on intercepts of telephone conversations of an LET operative based in Pakistan? If it did not do so on grounds of operational security, how come it is now sharing them with journalists? This only strengthens the suspicion that the IB and the R&AW show a greater readiness to share sensitive intelligence with journalists to protect themselves than with each other to protect the nation and its people. To which Ministries and departments were the reports sent and at what level?
6. Unless one looks into all these questions, one cannot say where the failures occurred, which made the terrorist strikes possible. In 1987, the R&AW received a human intelligence report about a Khalistani plot to kill Rajiv Gandhi, then Prime Minister, during his visit to Rajghat on Mahatma Gandhi's birthday. The R&AW officer----of the rank of Director, one rank below a Joint Secretary--- conveyed the information in a written note to a Joint Secretary in the Home Ministry and the Delhi Police. He did not alert other senior officers.
7. The report proved to be accurate. Rajiv Gandhi narrowly escaped the assassination attempt. T. N. Seshan, who was then co-ordinating the security arrangements for Rajiv Gandhi, was asked to enquire into this. He held both the Delhi Police and the R&AW responsible for omissions, which could have led to a national tragedy. He blamed the Delhi Police for inaction on the R&AW report and the R&AW for not realising the gravity of the information when it was received and for disseminating it at a lower level without alerting the senior officers responsible for Rajiv's security.
8. A report in the "Hindustan Times" of December 2, 2008, quotes an unnamed officer of the R&AW as saying that its job in the Mumbai case was over with sending the report to the concerned quarters in the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) and that it had no other responsibility since it does not operate in Indian territory.
8. This is a highly irresponsible mindset, which needs to be checked. B. N. Mallick and R. N. Kao, the founding fathers of the Indian intelligence, used to stress on their officers that the responsibility of an intelligence officer does not stop with his sending a memo or a note about intelligence of a serious nature collected. It is equally their responsibility to ensure that the intelligence receives the attention it deserves in the ministries and departments concerned and that the necessary follow-up action is taken. In respect of terrorism, the role and responsibility of an intelligence officer starts from the moment he collects a piece of intelligence and continues till it is acted upon and the act of terrorism thwarted.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Government of India, New Delhi, and presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
The Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) have mounted a damage-control exercise by sharing with senior journalists details of technical intelligence (TECHINT) collected by them, which clearly indicated that the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), the Pakistani terrorist organisation, which is a member of Osama bin Laden's International Islamic Front (IIF) For Jihad Against the Crusaders and the Jewish People, was planning to carry out sea-borne terrorist strikes against hotels on Mumbai's coast, one of the hotels being the Taj Mahal hotel, which was actually attacked and occupied by some terrorists on the night of November 26, 2008. This intelligence was disseminated by them to those responsible for physical security. It seems to be the contention of the IB and the R&AW that what happened in Mumbai was a serious instance of physical security failure and failure to act on available intelligence and not an instance of intelligence failure.
2. Other independent reports indicate that the reports were acted upon by the Mumbai Police and the security authorities of the Taj Mahal Hotel. It was not as if they ignored them. The Mumbai Police alerted the hotels mentioned in the R&AW report and advised them on the need to strengthen security. The Mumbai Police also set up a security barrier at a point near the sea where , in their assessment, clandestine landings might take place.
3. The two specific reports of the R&AW based on intercepts were disseminated in September. There was no follow-up report for nearly five weeks, either from the IB or the R&AW. As a result, the Mumbai Police and hotels downgraded the security alert. The Taj Mahal Hotel removed a security barrier, which they had erected, and the Mumbai Police removed the security barrier which they had set up to prevent clandestine landings. The terrorists from Pakistan seem to have landed at this very point, where the Mumbai Police had erected the security barrier on the receipt of the alert from the R&AW.
4. The R&AW and the IB have their offices in Mumbai headed by senior officers to interact closely with the local police and the Armed Forces units. All of them are members of special co-ordination committees. How come the IB and the R&AW officers did not come to know that the security alert had been downgraded following the non-receipt of any follow-up reports from the R&AW? Did the R&AW immediately advise the Mumbai Police, the Navy and the hotel authorities that the alert should be continued till they receive information that the LET has abandoned its plans?
5. While the intercepts of September speak well of the interception capability of the R&AW, it does not necessarily speak well of its capability for analysis, assessment and follow-up action. Many questions are relevant in this regard: In what form did it report the intelligence? Did it tone it down while reporting the intercepts in a paraphrased form? Did it tell the persons to whom it sent the two reports of September that the intelligence was based on intercepts of telephone conversations of an LET operative based in Pakistan? If it did not do so on grounds of operational security, how come it is now sharing them with journalists? This only strengthens the suspicion that the IB and the R&AW show a greater readiness to share sensitive intelligence with journalists to protect themselves than with each other to protect the nation and its people. To which Ministries and departments were the reports sent and at what level?
6. Unless one looks into all these questions, one cannot say where the failures occurred, which made the terrorist strikes possible. In 1987, the R&AW received a human intelligence report about a Khalistani plot to kill Rajiv Gandhi, then Prime Minister, during his visit to Rajghat on Mahatma Gandhi's birthday. The R&AW officer----of the rank of Director, one rank below a Joint Secretary--- conveyed the information in a written note to a Joint Secretary in the Home Ministry and the Delhi Police. He did not alert other senior officers.
7. The report proved to be accurate. Rajiv Gandhi narrowly escaped the assassination attempt. T. N. Seshan, who was then co-ordinating the security arrangements for Rajiv Gandhi, was asked to enquire into this. He held both the Delhi Police and the R&AW responsible for omissions, which could have led to a national tragedy. He blamed the Delhi Police for inaction on the R&AW report and the R&AW for not realising the gravity of the information when it was received and for disseminating it at a lower level without alerting the senior officers responsible for Rajiv's security.
8. A report in the "Hindustan Times" of December 2, 2008, quotes an unnamed officer of the R&AW as saying that its job in the Mumbai case was over with sending the report to the concerned quarters in the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) and that it had no other responsibility since it does not operate in Indian territory.
8. This is a highly irresponsible mindset, which needs to be checked. B. N. Mallick and R. N. Kao, the founding fathers of the Indian intelligence, used to stress on their officers that the responsibility of an intelligence officer does not stop with his sending a memo or a note about intelligence of a serious nature collected. It is equally their responsibility to ensure that the intelligence receives the attention it deserves in the ministries and departments concerned and that the necessary follow-up action is taken. In respect of terrorism, the role and responsibility of an intelligence officer starts from the moment he collects a piece of intelligence and continues till it is acted upon and the act of terrorism thwarted.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Government of India, New Delhi, and presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)
Mumbai Horror – I - Abject Failure Of The Political Community
Mumbai Horror – I - Abject Failure Of The Political Community
By Bhaskar Roy
There have been a lot of writing in the print media and sound bytes in the electronic media about intelligence failure in tackling terrorism. Of course, it is true to a large extent. The Intelligence Bureau (IB), the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) and other such organizations as specific institutions take the rap. They should. Seven medium to large scale terrorist attacks in the course of a year is not acceptable. The Mumbai terror carnage started on the night of November 26 and went on for 60 hours before it could be brought to a close.
The Mumbai police, the army and navy commandos and especially the NSG “Black Cats” did a highly commendable job. But around 200 innocent people lost their lives, the terrorists got huge publicity which will further encourage them and their mentors. There is no certainty that such attacks will not take place somewhere else in the country. Leaders refuse to answer why it took the NSG Commandos nine hours to reach Mumbai.
The Mumbai blood bath left India looking helpless and highly vulnerable. The cost in terms of human lives and iconic damage to building of Hotel Taj far exceeds success in eliminating the terrorists. It is not yet clear how many terrorists were there and how many have melted into Mumbai’s crowds. The ease with which two terrorists attacked the Leopold Cafe and then ran to the Oberoi hotel is a case in point. The Mumbai police and even the ATS, are not equipped or trained to confront such a situation. Yet, the initial response of these agencies is laudable. The courage and leadership of officers like the ATS Chief, the late Hemant Karkare and others who led from the front and laid down their lives in the course of duty, is exemplary.
Police, intelligence and security agencies, are by themselves, inanimate structures. What gives life to these agencies is the kind of human resources who run them, how well-equipped they are, and how independent they are to execute their responsibilities. Success or failure of intelligence largely depends on these issues.
The responsibility for the functioning of intelligence and security organization, and the police lie at the doorstep of politicians ---- both central and state. All top level appointments require the clearance of the Cabinet Committee of Appointments (CCA), and the Prime Minister. The R&AW is directly under the PMO and the Prime Minister is supposed to be its Minister. The IB is under the Home Ministry and the Home Minister is its Minister.
A mutual parasitic relationship between senior security officials including in the police, and politicians has emerged. This is one of the reasons that the proposed police reforms never took off. The government continues to run on some of the antiquated British police and intelligence laws which were meant to counter the Indian independence movement. These archaic laws prevent enforcement agencies from discharging their duties. At least the Central government should forthwith get into the long delayed act of setting up a special commission to revamp the intelligence apparatus to create a new structure to counter terrorism. To ask for a body like the “9/11 commission” of the USA may be too much. But it will be a farce and a travesty of morality and justice to appoint an uninitiated commission for the task.
It will be an arduous task to set up a new structure. Political interests are not going to give up their powers so easily, especially at the state levels. Yet, some basic structures exist which can be used as a base to build upon. Most central intelligence agencies, especially the IB, have some presence in the states. This may be the easier part of the task. The real difficulty will come when the requirement of amending the constitution comes up. Without that, it will be difficult to fix accountability at the senior level of the bureaucracy, and allow real independence to the agencies.
At the core of the strength of intelligence agencies is the recruitment of personnel. Intelligence officers are very different from bureaucrats, yet in time the differences between the two have been obliterated. Intelligence officers should have a very unique personality. What is required is ingrained natural dedication, innovativeness that is out of the ordinary, patience, certain affability and the courage to call a spade a spade. It is the psychology that matters. Rigorous psychological tests to enquire into these attributes are abysmally lacking during the recruitment process. Indian intelligence agencies have become less and less professional over the years. Hence gaping holes in intelligence collection is no longer surprising. Notwithstanding this, one may have any amount of raw information but this will not be of any use unless executed with the seriousness they deserve.
Political will and responsibility?
Will the Mumbai terrorist mayhem persuade the various political parties to unite at least for the security of the country? The Mumbaikars will mourn their dead, their losses, and gradually go back to life. But the lamentable personification of Mumbai as a resilient city should not make one forget the horrific tragedies of terrorism.
Some incorrigible politicians still cannot resist a possible opportunity to score points over Mumbai’s dead. Gujarat chief Minister Narendra Modi arrived at the home of the late Hemant Karkare with an offer of compensation to the family. Modi’s act to say the least, was ghoulish. He had unleashed a relentless character assassination campaign against Karkare for his investigation into the Malegaon blast. BJP leader and Prime Minister in waiting, L.K.Advani did not exactly cover himself with a non-partisan position. Mr. Advani, as an elder statesman and politician should have led his party by example to form a political coalition across the board on the issue of terrorism irrespective of any religious position. Unfortunately, elections and votes are not too far away from the minds of politicians.
It is a pity that the response of the Indian political actors across the board has been appeasement, finger pointing, political scoring, shifting blame and hand wringing. The vote bank always looms large in the political spectrum.
BJP Foreign Minister Yashwant Singh went to Kabul in 1999 to get Indian hostages released from the hijacked IC-814 Indian Airlines flight in exchange for the release of three hardened terrorists. One of them, Omar Sheik Saeed later went on to abduct journalist Daniel Pearl who was beheaded. Another, Maulana Masood Azar, the religious mentor of erstwhile Harkat-ul-Ansar, went on to form the Jaish-e-Mohammad with the help of the ISI. The third was Mustaq Ahmed Zargar who mowed down a large number of men, women and children in Kashmir.
Earlier, the Congress had released a number of terrorists in exchange for Home Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayed’s abducted daughter.
The Indian Parliament was attacked in 2002, and that has been followed by periodic terrorist attacks, uncovering of SIMI’s role, birth of the Indian Mujahideen, revelation of the Hindu militant organization Abhinav Bharat and their acts of terrorism, culminating in the devastation of Mumbai.
It is people’s outrage which forced the government and the ruling party to initiate some long delayed steps. Unfortunately, however, politicians are still rearing to get at each other’s throats, looking at the parliamentary elections in early 2009. This disease is unlikely to go away anytime soon.
Perhaps at the cost of being repetitive, the role of Maharashtra Chief Minister Vilas Rao Deshmukh and Home Minister R.R. Patil in connection with the Mumbai carnage must be highlighted as an example of political callousness. For once, there was enough intelligence available in advance to take some precautionary steps. It appears both were so obtuse as not even to call for a security meeting. Both reflect the general quality of India’s political community today.
In connection with the Mumbai horror, statements by two politicians must be recorded for posterity. After being turned away from the home of NSG Commando Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan, Kerala Chief Minister Achutanandan remarked that if had not been for Sandeep, “not even a dog would have visited the house”. And commenting on the outrage against politicians in Mumbai, BJP Vice President Muktar Naqvi retorted that a few people “Wearing lipstick and powder” and “tie and coat” holding candles do not represent the people of the country. Can anything be more deplorable? These are quintessential politicians. The political parties must now apply themselves to weed out the rotten ones from their midst.
"In a democracy we need political parties with the right kind of politicians".
(To be continued)
(Bhaskar Roy is an eminent analyst with many years of experience in political analysis. He can be reached at grouchohart@yahoo.com)
By Bhaskar Roy
There have been a lot of writing in the print media and sound bytes in the electronic media about intelligence failure in tackling terrorism. Of course, it is true to a large extent. The Intelligence Bureau (IB), the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) and other such organizations as specific institutions take the rap. They should. Seven medium to large scale terrorist attacks in the course of a year is not acceptable. The Mumbai terror carnage started on the night of November 26 and went on for 60 hours before it could be brought to a close.
The Mumbai police, the army and navy commandos and especially the NSG “Black Cats” did a highly commendable job. But around 200 innocent people lost their lives, the terrorists got huge publicity which will further encourage them and their mentors. There is no certainty that such attacks will not take place somewhere else in the country. Leaders refuse to answer why it took the NSG Commandos nine hours to reach Mumbai.
The Mumbai blood bath left India looking helpless and highly vulnerable. The cost in terms of human lives and iconic damage to building of Hotel Taj far exceeds success in eliminating the terrorists. It is not yet clear how many terrorists were there and how many have melted into Mumbai’s crowds. The ease with which two terrorists attacked the Leopold Cafe and then ran to the Oberoi hotel is a case in point. The Mumbai police and even the ATS, are not equipped or trained to confront such a situation. Yet, the initial response of these agencies is laudable. The courage and leadership of officers like the ATS Chief, the late Hemant Karkare and others who led from the front and laid down their lives in the course of duty, is exemplary.
Police, intelligence and security agencies, are by themselves, inanimate structures. What gives life to these agencies is the kind of human resources who run them, how well-equipped they are, and how independent they are to execute their responsibilities. Success or failure of intelligence largely depends on these issues.
The responsibility for the functioning of intelligence and security organization, and the police lie at the doorstep of politicians ---- both central and state. All top level appointments require the clearance of the Cabinet Committee of Appointments (CCA), and the Prime Minister. The R&AW is directly under the PMO and the Prime Minister is supposed to be its Minister. The IB is under the Home Ministry and the Home Minister is its Minister.
A mutual parasitic relationship between senior security officials including in the police, and politicians has emerged. This is one of the reasons that the proposed police reforms never took off. The government continues to run on some of the antiquated British police and intelligence laws which were meant to counter the Indian independence movement. These archaic laws prevent enforcement agencies from discharging their duties. At least the Central government should forthwith get into the long delayed act of setting up a special commission to revamp the intelligence apparatus to create a new structure to counter terrorism. To ask for a body like the “9/11 commission” of the USA may be too much. But it will be a farce and a travesty of morality and justice to appoint an uninitiated commission for the task.
It will be an arduous task to set up a new structure. Political interests are not going to give up their powers so easily, especially at the state levels. Yet, some basic structures exist which can be used as a base to build upon. Most central intelligence agencies, especially the IB, have some presence in the states. This may be the easier part of the task. The real difficulty will come when the requirement of amending the constitution comes up. Without that, it will be difficult to fix accountability at the senior level of the bureaucracy, and allow real independence to the agencies.
At the core of the strength of intelligence agencies is the recruitment of personnel. Intelligence officers are very different from bureaucrats, yet in time the differences between the two have been obliterated. Intelligence officers should have a very unique personality. What is required is ingrained natural dedication, innovativeness that is out of the ordinary, patience, certain affability and the courage to call a spade a spade. It is the psychology that matters. Rigorous psychological tests to enquire into these attributes are abysmally lacking during the recruitment process. Indian intelligence agencies have become less and less professional over the years. Hence gaping holes in intelligence collection is no longer surprising. Notwithstanding this, one may have any amount of raw information but this will not be of any use unless executed with the seriousness they deserve.
Political will and responsibility?
Will the Mumbai terrorist mayhem persuade the various political parties to unite at least for the security of the country? The Mumbaikars will mourn their dead, their losses, and gradually go back to life. But the lamentable personification of Mumbai as a resilient city should not make one forget the horrific tragedies of terrorism.
Some incorrigible politicians still cannot resist a possible opportunity to score points over Mumbai’s dead. Gujarat chief Minister Narendra Modi arrived at the home of the late Hemant Karkare with an offer of compensation to the family. Modi’s act to say the least, was ghoulish. He had unleashed a relentless character assassination campaign against Karkare for his investigation into the Malegaon blast. BJP leader and Prime Minister in waiting, L.K.Advani did not exactly cover himself with a non-partisan position. Mr. Advani, as an elder statesman and politician should have led his party by example to form a political coalition across the board on the issue of terrorism irrespective of any religious position. Unfortunately, elections and votes are not too far away from the minds of politicians.
It is a pity that the response of the Indian political actors across the board has been appeasement, finger pointing, political scoring, shifting blame and hand wringing. The vote bank always looms large in the political spectrum.
BJP Foreign Minister Yashwant Singh went to Kabul in 1999 to get Indian hostages released from the hijacked IC-814 Indian Airlines flight in exchange for the release of three hardened terrorists. One of them, Omar Sheik Saeed later went on to abduct journalist Daniel Pearl who was beheaded. Another, Maulana Masood Azar, the religious mentor of erstwhile Harkat-ul-Ansar, went on to form the Jaish-e-Mohammad with the help of the ISI. The third was Mustaq Ahmed Zargar who mowed down a large number of men, women and children in Kashmir.
Earlier, the Congress had released a number of terrorists in exchange for Home Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayed’s abducted daughter.
The Indian Parliament was attacked in 2002, and that has been followed by periodic terrorist attacks, uncovering of SIMI’s role, birth of the Indian Mujahideen, revelation of the Hindu militant organization Abhinav Bharat and their acts of terrorism, culminating in the devastation of Mumbai.
It is people’s outrage which forced the government and the ruling party to initiate some long delayed steps. Unfortunately, however, politicians are still rearing to get at each other’s throats, looking at the parliamentary elections in early 2009. This disease is unlikely to go away anytime soon.
Perhaps at the cost of being repetitive, the role of Maharashtra Chief Minister Vilas Rao Deshmukh and Home Minister R.R. Patil in connection with the Mumbai carnage must be highlighted as an example of political callousness. For once, there was enough intelligence available in advance to take some precautionary steps. It appears both were so obtuse as not even to call for a security meeting. Both reflect the general quality of India’s political community today.
In connection with the Mumbai horror, statements by two politicians must be recorded for posterity. After being turned away from the home of NSG Commando Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan, Kerala Chief Minister Achutanandan remarked that if had not been for Sandeep, “not even a dog would have visited the house”. And commenting on the outrage against politicians in Mumbai, BJP Vice President Muktar Naqvi retorted that a few people “Wearing lipstick and powder” and “tie and coat” holding candles do not represent the people of the country. Can anything be more deplorable? These are quintessential politicians. The political parties must now apply themselves to weed out the rotten ones from their midst.
"In a democracy we need political parties with the right kind of politicians".
(To be continued)
(Bhaskar Roy is an eminent analyst with many years of experience in political analysis. He can be reached at grouchohart@yahoo.com)
Mumbai Horror – II - Foreign Interlocutions
By Bhaskar Roy
The Mumbai terrorist carnage of November 26 which lasted 60 hours or more may not be totally over yet as a challenge to a much bigger dimension of vulnerability to such attacks. The international community is truly alarmed as the implications are very wide in terms of regional stability in more ways than one.
The Mumbai attack was a well planned international targeting. A very specific evidence of this was the attack on the Nariman House. Very few Mumbaikars were even aware that the Nariman House had changed its name and was Chabad House for Jews. One reason could be that very few Jews are left in Mumbai and the rest of India, though they are a respected community. This was a prime target of the terrorists and the inmates, all Jews, were not only killed but tortured before they were killed.
The other evidence was the terrorists were specifically looking for American and British citizens, the two countries mainly engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan anti-terror war.
India is one of the four rising economies in the world and Mumbai is India’s financial and commercial center, where western financial entities are closely involved. Scaring away investment from India is one of the surest ways to hurt the country, especially in the midst of the current global financial meltdown.
Obviously, it was a well trained multi-tasked terrorist detachment somewhat reminiscent of the “9/11” Al Qaeda attack in the USA. In a way, the Mumbai “26/11” was better planned to strike at more than one target each with specific aims. Therefore, some claims that the Al Qaeda and its supporting groups are weakening are not true.
Reports of weakening of terrorist leaders and their organizations are part of psychological warfare indulged in by the terrorist minds, to keep security forces closing them. Towards the end of the 1990s, it was strongly rumored that Osama bin Laden was on kidney dialysis and was not likely to last for long in the caves of Tora Bora in Afghanistan. Most of the intelligence world including Indians gave a lot of credence to the news, since the information was linked to the Pakistani intelligence. It was said that two dialysis machine had transited Pak territory to Afghanistan. It was later proved to be false information deliberately planted.
Similar misinformation which the Soviet KGB used called “Active Measures” and being indulged in by the terrorists and their handlers adversely impact many of our policy makers and analysts, ultimately resulting in lowering counter-terrorism efforts. This was reflected when the NSG commandos took nine hours to reach Mumbai. They were totally unprepared, and logistically, woefully under equipped.
News and information is not intelligence. This differentiation is important, It is not a secret that India has intelligence liaisons with several countries including the USA, the UK, Israel, Russia and others. Joint Working Groups (JWG) on terrorism have been established with many of them. Even if we get actionable intelligence from them, to act on them decisively requires political clearance.
Given the new upsurge in Indo-US relations, Washington will expectedly be closely engaged with India in the Mumbai terrorism. But New York Times reporter Jane Perlez wrote from Pakistan, “India’s suspicion of Pakistan clouds US strategy in Region”, suggesting the US would have some problems in this situation.
Ms. Perlez had a very important point. The current US strategy is to try and eradicate Islamic terrorists from Afghanistan and Pakistan’s northern and north-west borders with Afghanistan. Washington’s concern would be that if tensions between India and Pakistan rise the Pak army may shift focus from counter-terrorism operations to the Indo-Pak borders. The US is very much seized of the fact that the operation conducted by the Pak army against the terrorists under US pressure is with some reservations and reluctance.
The upcoming US policy will have its impact on how India tackles external sponsored terrorism. The mood of the people not only in Mumbai but also in other parts of India is one of outrage. Many want affirmative action, but there is very little support for a war. The Indian government has assured that no army movement will take place towards the borders with Pakistan. In such an event, the USA’s larger strategy in Pakistan, Afghanistan and adjoining Central Asian regions should continue as it is.
There is no doubt that the US possesses the best technical, intelligence and military wherewithal to act in the region. They shared some vital information with their Indian counterparts ahead of this Mumbai attacks, according to the media. But if they were privy to this information, why did they not build up on it? If they had, which is normal for any intelligence agency, did they keep the Indians informed? Or is it, that they held back hoping things will dissipate, India would not react in the absence of action, and their strategy will not be disturbed. This is not an unknown habit of the US intelligence community. After all, they revealed knowledge of the ISI’s involvement in the July attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul, after some heat had settled down and they needed to disclose it to castigate the rouge acts of the ISI.
The Bush administration, the Pentagon and the US intelligence agencies must learn that the Mumbai carnage has more international terror character emanating from Pakistan rather than just a Pakistan-India incident. In South Asia, it extends to Bangladesh as evidence has proved not only now but for quite sometime. If the Americans still think that placating the Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (BJEI) would protect their interests, they are being short sighted as always. The terrorist modules active in Bangladesh are a coalition of the ISI, LeT, Al Qaeda with assistance from Islamic elements in the country’s politics and administration. If not addressed purposefully, this establishment will not stop at attacking only India, but US and other western countries directly involved in countering terrorism.
Following Mumbai 11/26, there was an outpouring of condolences and sympathy from the world over. Against such a carnage, no country would like to be seen to be out of synchronization. The proof of which country is watching from the side lines to see India bleed, and which countries come out sincerely to co-operate to counter this terrorist attack on the international community will be seen through concrete actions. Weakening India is the strategy of a number of governments in India’s periphery. A number of South Asian governments and their interests hope that the best way to down size India is to bring in another large non-South Asian neighbour into the region’s ambit. One need not say more.
The reaction of the international media in the immediate aftermath of the Mumbai “11/26” gives some clues to the enormity of the incident and its possible fall out. Sections of the mainstream Pakistani media reflected back on earlier policies of the leaders which have now come to visit the country. Some comments in the Bangladeshi media reiterated in this context the rejuvenation of its own Islamic terrorists and their threat to the country’s body fabric. Some of the western media saw in this horrific incident a diabolical design to disrupt the Indian economy and a revival of international jihad.
The full dimensions of Mumbai’s “9/11” have not yet been revealed, and is being examined by the authorities according to media reports. The intelligence agencies may be on the track, but they cannot afford to give out details. The demand on these agencies and their political controllers is to go much beyond what they have seen in the past.
One hears little about exchanges with Russia. The Russian media has talked about information with their intelligence agencies about involvement of the Al Qaeda and Chechen rebels in the Mumbai attack. If true, it enlarges the family connections of the terrorist and leads to Al Qaeda’s International Islamic Front (IIF). The Chechen and Uzbek Islamic militants had been brought together by Pakistan’s ISI. The ISI grown terrorists like the LET and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEI) were merged with the Taliban, the Al Qaeda, and other foreign elements to fight in Kashmir.
Here is a major contradiction that Indian authorities will be faced with, that is, the growing estrangement between the US and Russia over a number of strategic and territorial control issues. India is no push over. In national security interests it must get whatever it can from whichever quarters, and not forget old friends. At the same time, there are new friends.
The bottom line is that each major friend has its own agenda which will not totally align with that of India’s. Hence, the best management is called for, and it is not all that difficult. Competing friends would understand.
(Bhaskar Roy is an eminent analyst with many years of experience in political analysis. He can be reached at grouchohart@yahoo.com)
The Mumbai terrorist carnage of November 26 which lasted 60 hours or more may not be totally over yet as a challenge to a much bigger dimension of vulnerability to such attacks. The international community is truly alarmed as the implications are very wide in terms of regional stability in more ways than one.
The Mumbai attack was a well planned international targeting. A very specific evidence of this was the attack on the Nariman House. Very few Mumbaikars were even aware that the Nariman House had changed its name and was Chabad House for Jews. One reason could be that very few Jews are left in Mumbai and the rest of India, though they are a respected community. This was a prime target of the terrorists and the inmates, all Jews, were not only killed but tortured before they were killed.
The other evidence was the terrorists were specifically looking for American and British citizens, the two countries mainly engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan anti-terror war.
India is one of the four rising economies in the world and Mumbai is India’s financial and commercial center, where western financial entities are closely involved. Scaring away investment from India is one of the surest ways to hurt the country, especially in the midst of the current global financial meltdown.
Obviously, it was a well trained multi-tasked terrorist detachment somewhat reminiscent of the “9/11” Al Qaeda attack in the USA. In a way, the Mumbai “26/11” was better planned to strike at more than one target each with specific aims. Therefore, some claims that the Al Qaeda and its supporting groups are weakening are not true.
Reports of weakening of terrorist leaders and their organizations are part of psychological warfare indulged in by the terrorist minds, to keep security forces closing them. Towards the end of the 1990s, it was strongly rumored that Osama bin Laden was on kidney dialysis and was not likely to last for long in the caves of Tora Bora in Afghanistan. Most of the intelligence world including Indians gave a lot of credence to the news, since the information was linked to the Pakistani intelligence. It was said that two dialysis machine had transited Pak territory to Afghanistan. It was later proved to be false information deliberately planted.
Similar misinformation which the Soviet KGB used called “Active Measures” and being indulged in by the terrorists and their handlers adversely impact many of our policy makers and analysts, ultimately resulting in lowering counter-terrorism efforts. This was reflected when the NSG commandos took nine hours to reach Mumbai. They were totally unprepared, and logistically, woefully under equipped.
News and information is not intelligence. This differentiation is important, It is not a secret that India has intelligence liaisons with several countries including the USA, the UK, Israel, Russia and others. Joint Working Groups (JWG) on terrorism have been established with many of them. Even if we get actionable intelligence from them, to act on them decisively requires political clearance.
Given the new upsurge in Indo-US relations, Washington will expectedly be closely engaged with India in the Mumbai terrorism. But New York Times reporter Jane Perlez wrote from Pakistan, “India’s suspicion of Pakistan clouds US strategy in Region”, suggesting the US would have some problems in this situation.
Ms. Perlez had a very important point. The current US strategy is to try and eradicate Islamic terrorists from Afghanistan and Pakistan’s northern and north-west borders with Afghanistan. Washington’s concern would be that if tensions between India and Pakistan rise the Pak army may shift focus from counter-terrorism operations to the Indo-Pak borders. The US is very much seized of the fact that the operation conducted by the Pak army against the terrorists under US pressure is with some reservations and reluctance.
The upcoming US policy will have its impact on how India tackles external sponsored terrorism. The mood of the people not only in Mumbai but also in other parts of India is one of outrage. Many want affirmative action, but there is very little support for a war. The Indian government has assured that no army movement will take place towards the borders with Pakistan. In such an event, the USA’s larger strategy in Pakistan, Afghanistan and adjoining Central Asian regions should continue as it is.
There is no doubt that the US possesses the best technical, intelligence and military wherewithal to act in the region. They shared some vital information with their Indian counterparts ahead of this Mumbai attacks, according to the media. But if they were privy to this information, why did they not build up on it? If they had, which is normal for any intelligence agency, did they keep the Indians informed? Or is it, that they held back hoping things will dissipate, India would not react in the absence of action, and their strategy will not be disturbed. This is not an unknown habit of the US intelligence community. After all, they revealed knowledge of the ISI’s involvement in the July attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul, after some heat had settled down and they needed to disclose it to castigate the rouge acts of the ISI.
The Bush administration, the Pentagon and the US intelligence agencies must learn that the Mumbai carnage has more international terror character emanating from Pakistan rather than just a Pakistan-India incident. In South Asia, it extends to Bangladesh as evidence has proved not only now but for quite sometime. If the Americans still think that placating the Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (BJEI) would protect their interests, they are being short sighted as always. The terrorist modules active in Bangladesh are a coalition of the ISI, LeT, Al Qaeda with assistance from Islamic elements in the country’s politics and administration. If not addressed purposefully, this establishment will not stop at attacking only India, but US and other western countries directly involved in countering terrorism.
Following Mumbai 11/26, there was an outpouring of condolences and sympathy from the world over. Against such a carnage, no country would like to be seen to be out of synchronization. The proof of which country is watching from the side lines to see India bleed, and which countries come out sincerely to co-operate to counter this terrorist attack on the international community will be seen through concrete actions. Weakening India is the strategy of a number of governments in India’s periphery. A number of South Asian governments and their interests hope that the best way to down size India is to bring in another large non-South Asian neighbour into the region’s ambit. One need not say more.
The reaction of the international media in the immediate aftermath of the Mumbai “11/26” gives some clues to the enormity of the incident and its possible fall out. Sections of the mainstream Pakistani media reflected back on earlier policies of the leaders which have now come to visit the country. Some comments in the Bangladeshi media reiterated in this context the rejuvenation of its own Islamic terrorists and their threat to the country’s body fabric. Some of the western media saw in this horrific incident a diabolical design to disrupt the Indian economy and a revival of international jihad.
The full dimensions of Mumbai’s “9/11” have not yet been revealed, and is being examined by the authorities according to media reports. The intelligence agencies may be on the track, but they cannot afford to give out details. The demand on these agencies and their political controllers is to go much beyond what they have seen in the past.
One hears little about exchanges with Russia. The Russian media has talked about information with their intelligence agencies about involvement of the Al Qaeda and Chechen rebels in the Mumbai attack. If true, it enlarges the family connections of the terrorist and leads to Al Qaeda’s International Islamic Front (IIF). The Chechen and Uzbek Islamic militants had been brought together by Pakistan’s ISI. The ISI grown terrorists like the LET and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEI) were merged with the Taliban, the Al Qaeda, and other foreign elements to fight in Kashmir.
Here is a major contradiction that Indian authorities will be faced with, that is, the growing estrangement between the US and Russia over a number of strategic and territorial control issues. India is no push over. In national security interests it must get whatever it can from whichever quarters, and not forget old friends. At the same time, there are new friends.
The bottom line is that each major friend has its own agenda which will not totally align with that of India’s. Hence, the best management is called for, and it is not all that difficult. Competing friends would understand.
(Bhaskar Roy is an eminent analyst with many years of experience in political analysis. He can be reached at grouchohart@yahoo.com)
MUMBAI HORROR-III-HOW PAKISTAN ACQUITS ITSELF
By Bhaskar Roy
The well read Pakistani daily The News (Nov.28) made a pithy observation in the following words when commenting on Pak based terrorism and the Mumbai terror attack – ”The question is what we, as a nation, can do to alter this situation and save ourselves. Too much time has already been lost. The costs – to reputation, to investment, to the welfare of the country have been immense. Pakistanis struggle to obain visas; colleges overseas hesitate to admit students for fear that they are terrorists. People who are innocent suffer”. The article goes on to warn if Pakistan does not handle the Mumbai issue with commitment and purpose the anger generated in the aftermath will “assume the form of a ferocious storm that we may not be able to withstand”.
Before going further certain issues need to be clarified. Neither the Indian government nor the people of India have charged the current elected government of Pakistan of being complicit in this devastating and cold blooded attack. What is being asked of the Pakistani government is to act, and act fast and decisively to bring the perpetrators of this crime to justice. There is too much empirical evidence available that the terrorists were trained in and launched from, Pakistan’s soil, for any denial. India’s demand from the Pakistani government is to match its words of sentiment and empathy and deliver the terrorists and their godfathers. This is the least that India could ask for from Pakistan. The Pakistani government would also prove its credentials to the world, and its own legitimacy to the people of Pakistan if it responds positively. The Pakistani media must also try and see the truth and refrain from protesting that India has no proof that the Mumbai terrorists came from Pakistan. They can create a public opinion, but it will finally go the way the post “9/11” arguments went. There is a hundred mile long proved and documented record of Pakistan based terrorism from “9/11” onwards. The Pakistani media would do well to take these facts into consideration before they deny any involvement of Pakistani based terrorists in Mumbai. It would do Pakistan a lot of good eventually.
When discussing the Pakistani government, it must be clearly understood that it does not include the Pakistani armed forces and its all pervading intelligence organization, the ISI, an organization famous for its notoriety than counter-terrorism activities. The armed forces, especially the Pakistani army and the ISI are umbilically connected. There are levels in the ISI who have widespread links among the militants and Islamic terrorists some of which it created for military and terrorism in Kashmir and Afghanistan. The ISI believes that it can unleash an Islamic militant revolution in the country which, even if the army wants, may be difficult to control. Otherwise, Baitullah Masud’s Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) would not have threatened they would try to take over most of Pakistan unless the government stopped co-operation with the NATO forces. The tribal Taliban are rarely known to make empty threats. The TTP threat was conditioned to the actions of Pakistan’s new government. Baitullah Masud obviously has important friends sharing his ideology in Pakistan’s security apparatus.
In August this year, US President George W. Bush appraised visiting Pakistan Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani that elements in the ISI were sharing actionable intelligence provided by the CIA with the Taliban and Al Qaeda. This helped these militants to avoid pin-pointed attacks. CIA Chief Mike Mullen handed over a dossier to Gilani about the ISI’s links with the militants, and concrete evidence of the ISI’s involvement in the July attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul in which the Indian Military Attache and a promising diplomat died. The Americans also made it clear that Army Chief Gen. Asfaq Kayani would have been aware of this operation carried out on the ground by Taliban fighters.
Since then, it appears the US has not been sharing any important counter-terrorism operation with the ISI or even the Pakistani army, resorting mainly to attacks by drones armed with hell-fire missiles.
A façade has been created that the Pak army has retreated from anything political, and the elected government runs the show. In an astute move, Gen. Kayani withdrew armed forces personnel from all civilian posts. It did create an impression on the people of Pakistan and the international community, initially. The Americans were also taken in, but not for long. What Kayani allowed the government was general administration and repair of the economy, a very difficult task indeed as has been proved. The security issues and foreign policy in the region is controlled by Kayani and his colleagues in an over arching way. The President and the Prime Minister are not allowed to go beyond a certain perimeter in these areas. The intense pressure exerted on them is very rarely visible to the uninitiated eye.
This is the reason why the Pakistani mainstream media, though aware of the inner machinations, are not able to go beyond a point. Too much upheaval may tempt the military to retake power.
There is no doubt whatsoever that the Pakistani defence and inelligence establishments are fixated on India, Kashmir and Afghanistan. Addressing a NATO defence conference in Brussels (Nov. 19) Gen. Kayani explained the international perception of Pakistan’s “Indo-centric” character must be viewed in “historical, geographical and cultural context”. Kayani represents the view of Pakistan’s defence, security and strategic establishment. The Indo-Pak peace process is not in the larger interest of the Pakistani armed forces.
What he said in Brussels was that Pakistan could not see India as a friend even– history, geography and culture cannot change. The respected Pakistani daily the Dawn also gave the view of the Pakistani army that they could not concentrate on the “war of terror” unless the ‘Kashmir issue was resolved”.
One should not disregard the sincerity of President Asif Ali Zardari’s statements on the Mumbai terrorist attack. It cannot be forgotten that he lost his wife and former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto last December in a terrorist attack. Suspicion of Pakistani intelligence involvement in Bhutto’s assassination is yet to be cleared. Zardari has also come under severe attack from the security and strategic establishment for his recent friendly overtures to India.
While it is true that Pakistan is suffering from major terrorist attacks from those elements it created to fight India, it is difficult to accept that terrorists with trucks and vehicles loaded with explosives could roam around the streets of Islambadd, Lahore and Karachi without collusion with the intelligence agencies.
In the days and weeks leading to the Mumbai attack there was a huge campaign in Pakistan that India was involved not only in the insurgency in Baluchaistan but also in tribal areas of Pakistan! Another campaign says India is deploying troops and intelligence agents in huge numbers in Afghanistan to block Pakistan’s and China’s connectivity with Central Asia.
Although the Gen. Musharraf government went through some cursory moves to ban the LET and JEM, they continue to be as active as ever and collecting Zakat. The head of LET Hafeez Mohamd Saeed and the JEM Amir Mohamad Masoor Azad continue to move freely in Pakistan. It is the responsibility of President Zardari’s government to hand over the list of twenty asked by the Indian government. A start can be made with a few of these terrorists, at least.
What is significant is the confession of the arrested terrorist Amir Kasar in Mumbai detailing training by the Pak navy, involvement of the ISI and the leading role of the LET. The fact that preparations for the Mumbai attacks may have been going on for almost one year would also implicate Musharraf who was holding total power in Pakistan till mid-February, this year. The planning and preparations continued till the operation was launched.
The entire preparation replicates those of “9/11” and the London tube bombings in terms of preparation. Terrorists were gradually placed in position and targets well cased in advance. The concept reflects that of Al Qaeda. But recruiting young men from poor families is a hall mark of the ISI and the LET.
Pakistan’s offer of joint investigation is clearly not acceptable. Such collaboration involve exchange of intelligence with ISI and Pakistan’s CID and IB. This is a total no, no. Even the US has stopped exchange of intelligence with ISI and the Pakistani army. The position taken by Pakistan is unfortunate, but nothing new. No amount of evidence is going to suffice because the evidence will be rejected. We have come to the same stone walling effect. So, what is the way around?
The differences between Pakistan’s new civilian government, and the defence and intelligence establishment is obvious. It is jokingly said that the elected government talks, the unelected army runs the country.
Of course, the US will put pressure on India not to raise tensions with Pakistan further, although President - elect Barrack Obama said India has the right to protect itself, in other words, strike Pakistan based terrorist camps.
It is for the USA and the international community to act decisively in Pakistan and remove the veil over Pakistan’s terrorist establishment and bring those responsible to full justice. People like Dawood Ibrahim, Hafeez Saeed, Masood Azar and other must be extradited forthwith.
If Pakistan’s civilian government is to last, the democracy protected, and for the India-Pakistan peace process to continue, Washington and others must do what they know they should do.
The Pakistani army is determinedly moving to a situation that they appear to be blind to. A crash is likely. If necessary, as it seems imperative, no more palliatives should be on offer. From there on, Pakistan would have to be rebuilt with help from all including India. But this situation cannot be allowed to continue. Some blood may have to be spilled for the greater good of all. Concluded
The well read Pakistani daily The News (Nov.28) made a pithy observation in the following words when commenting on Pak based terrorism and the Mumbai terror attack – ”The question is what we, as a nation, can do to alter this situation and save ourselves. Too much time has already been lost. The costs – to reputation, to investment, to the welfare of the country have been immense. Pakistanis struggle to obain visas; colleges overseas hesitate to admit students for fear that they are terrorists. People who are innocent suffer”. The article goes on to warn if Pakistan does not handle the Mumbai issue with commitment and purpose the anger generated in the aftermath will “assume the form of a ferocious storm that we may not be able to withstand”.
Before going further certain issues need to be clarified. Neither the Indian government nor the people of India have charged the current elected government of Pakistan of being complicit in this devastating and cold blooded attack. What is being asked of the Pakistani government is to act, and act fast and decisively to bring the perpetrators of this crime to justice. There is too much empirical evidence available that the terrorists were trained in and launched from, Pakistan’s soil, for any denial. India’s demand from the Pakistani government is to match its words of sentiment and empathy and deliver the terrorists and their godfathers. This is the least that India could ask for from Pakistan. The Pakistani government would also prove its credentials to the world, and its own legitimacy to the people of Pakistan if it responds positively. The Pakistani media must also try and see the truth and refrain from protesting that India has no proof that the Mumbai terrorists came from Pakistan. They can create a public opinion, but it will finally go the way the post “9/11” arguments went. There is a hundred mile long proved and documented record of Pakistan based terrorism from “9/11” onwards. The Pakistani media would do well to take these facts into consideration before they deny any involvement of Pakistani based terrorists in Mumbai. It would do Pakistan a lot of good eventually.
When discussing the Pakistani government, it must be clearly understood that it does not include the Pakistani armed forces and its all pervading intelligence organization, the ISI, an organization famous for its notoriety than counter-terrorism activities. The armed forces, especially the Pakistani army and the ISI are umbilically connected. There are levels in the ISI who have widespread links among the militants and Islamic terrorists some of which it created for military and terrorism in Kashmir and Afghanistan. The ISI believes that it can unleash an Islamic militant revolution in the country which, even if the army wants, may be difficult to control. Otherwise, Baitullah Masud’s Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) would not have threatened they would try to take over most of Pakistan unless the government stopped co-operation with the NATO forces. The tribal Taliban are rarely known to make empty threats. The TTP threat was conditioned to the actions of Pakistan’s new government. Baitullah Masud obviously has important friends sharing his ideology in Pakistan’s security apparatus.
In August this year, US President George W. Bush appraised visiting Pakistan Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani that elements in the ISI were sharing actionable intelligence provided by the CIA with the Taliban and Al Qaeda. This helped these militants to avoid pin-pointed attacks. CIA Chief Mike Mullen handed over a dossier to Gilani about the ISI’s links with the militants, and concrete evidence of the ISI’s involvement in the July attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul in which the Indian Military Attache and a promising diplomat died. The Americans also made it clear that Army Chief Gen. Asfaq Kayani would have been aware of this operation carried out on the ground by Taliban fighters.
Since then, it appears the US has not been sharing any important counter-terrorism operation with the ISI or even the Pakistani army, resorting mainly to attacks by drones armed with hell-fire missiles.
A façade has been created that the Pak army has retreated from anything political, and the elected government runs the show. In an astute move, Gen. Kayani withdrew armed forces personnel from all civilian posts. It did create an impression on the people of Pakistan and the international community, initially. The Americans were also taken in, but not for long. What Kayani allowed the government was general administration and repair of the economy, a very difficult task indeed as has been proved. The security issues and foreign policy in the region is controlled by Kayani and his colleagues in an over arching way. The President and the Prime Minister are not allowed to go beyond a certain perimeter in these areas. The intense pressure exerted on them is very rarely visible to the uninitiated eye.
This is the reason why the Pakistani mainstream media, though aware of the inner machinations, are not able to go beyond a point. Too much upheaval may tempt the military to retake power.
There is no doubt whatsoever that the Pakistani defence and inelligence establishments are fixated on India, Kashmir and Afghanistan. Addressing a NATO defence conference in Brussels (Nov. 19) Gen. Kayani explained the international perception of Pakistan’s “Indo-centric” character must be viewed in “historical, geographical and cultural context”. Kayani represents the view of Pakistan’s defence, security and strategic establishment. The Indo-Pak peace process is not in the larger interest of the Pakistani armed forces.
What he said in Brussels was that Pakistan could not see India as a friend even– history, geography and culture cannot change. The respected Pakistani daily the Dawn also gave the view of the Pakistani army that they could not concentrate on the “war of terror” unless the ‘Kashmir issue was resolved”.
One should not disregard the sincerity of President Asif Ali Zardari’s statements on the Mumbai terrorist attack. It cannot be forgotten that he lost his wife and former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto last December in a terrorist attack. Suspicion of Pakistani intelligence involvement in Bhutto’s assassination is yet to be cleared. Zardari has also come under severe attack from the security and strategic establishment for his recent friendly overtures to India.
While it is true that Pakistan is suffering from major terrorist attacks from those elements it created to fight India, it is difficult to accept that terrorists with trucks and vehicles loaded with explosives could roam around the streets of Islambadd, Lahore and Karachi without collusion with the intelligence agencies.
In the days and weeks leading to the Mumbai attack there was a huge campaign in Pakistan that India was involved not only in the insurgency in Baluchaistan but also in tribal areas of Pakistan! Another campaign says India is deploying troops and intelligence agents in huge numbers in Afghanistan to block Pakistan’s and China’s connectivity with Central Asia.
Although the Gen. Musharraf government went through some cursory moves to ban the LET and JEM, they continue to be as active as ever and collecting Zakat. The head of LET Hafeez Mohamd Saeed and the JEM Amir Mohamad Masoor Azad continue to move freely in Pakistan. It is the responsibility of President Zardari’s government to hand over the list of twenty asked by the Indian government. A start can be made with a few of these terrorists, at least.
What is significant is the confession of the arrested terrorist Amir Kasar in Mumbai detailing training by the Pak navy, involvement of the ISI and the leading role of the LET. The fact that preparations for the Mumbai attacks may have been going on for almost one year would also implicate Musharraf who was holding total power in Pakistan till mid-February, this year. The planning and preparations continued till the operation was launched.
The entire preparation replicates those of “9/11” and the London tube bombings in terms of preparation. Terrorists were gradually placed in position and targets well cased in advance. The concept reflects that of Al Qaeda. But recruiting young men from poor families is a hall mark of the ISI and the LET.
Pakistan’s offer of joint investigation is clearly not acceptable. Such collaboration involve exchange of intelligence with ISI and Pakistan’s CID and IB. This is a total no, no. Even the US has stopped exchange of intelligence with ISI and the Pakistani army. The position taken by Pakistan is unfortunate, but nothing new. No amount of evidence is going to suffice because the evidence will be rejected. We have come to the same stone walling effect. So, what is the way around?
The differences between Pakistan’s new civilian government, and the defence and intelligence establishment is obvious. It is jokingly said that the elected government talks, the unelected army runs the country.
Of course, the US will put pressure on India not to raise tensions with Pakistan further, although President - elect Barrack Obama said India has the right to protect itself, in other words, strike Pakistan based terrorist camps.
It is for the USA and the international community to act decisively in Pakistan and remove the veil over Pakistan’s terrorist establishment and bring those responsible to full justice. People like Dawood Ibrahim, Hafeez Saeed, Masood Azar and other must be extradited forthwith.
If Pakistan’s civilian government is to last, the democracy protected, and for the India-Pakistan peace process to continue, Washington and others must do what they know they should do.
The Pakistani army is determinedly moving to a situation that they appear to be blind to. A crash is likely. If necessary, as it seems imperative, no more palliatives should be on offer. From there on, Pakistan would have to be rebuilt with help from all including India. But this situation cannot be allowed to continue. Some blood may have to be spilled for the greater good of all. Concluded
December 02, 2008
Ageing police force ails Punjab security
3 Dec 2008, 0402 hrs IST, Ramaninder K Bhatia, TNN
CHANDIGARH: Punjab is not a stranger to deadly terror strikes. In fact, it has one of the bloodiest histories of violence. But what if it were made
a target once again, as intelligence reports keep pointing out, especially keeping in mind the sheer volume of explosives including deadly consignments of RDX arms and ammunitions being constantly confiscated from its porous international borders?
Only God could save it as its police force battling lack of preparedness, old age and devoid of infrastructure, would be woefully wanting on all fronts. To start with, the state does not have a single Quick Reaction Team (QRT). Worse, most of the commandoes in the state's 5 commando battalions are well past the age of 35 as the last major recruitment was carried out way back in 1992.
The state has only one young commando unit which is the force's major strike arm, for which recruitment was done in early 2000. And this for a state which went through harrowing terror just over a decade back and has fringe elements lurking in the shadows to foment trouble.
``The threat is real, very real, especially since large RDX hauls have been routinely intercepted in the state,'' admitted a senior cop. Two major hauls in Ludhiana alone this year have yielded 59 kgs of RDX while a Khalistan Zindabad Force (KZF) consignment of arms, fake currency and RDX sent to Punjab to bump off the Dera Sacha Sauda chief Ram Rahim Singh was recently apprehended in two major raids at Amritsar and Ferozepur, both border areas.
But there is some movement in the lethargic police force and it has decided to send a team to Mumbai to study lessons learnt after the recent attack there. Two days back, DGP N S Aulakh ordered all district police chiefs to set up QRTs and the government has hurriedly approved 2,000 new vacancies for the ageing ranks.
``Something like Andhra Pradesh's Grey Hounds, an elite anti-terror force raised to deal with Naxals is what we ideally want, except that the new force has to be trained to deal with urban terror strikes,'' senior cops said.
Aulakh added, ``Security in the districts is being ramped up and the force is keeping an eye on all big hotels, malls, sensitive places et al and CCTVs are being installed at crowded places.''
The force has recently written to the Union government to release funds for buying equipment meant for disaster management, a non-existent concept in the state so far. Efforts are also afoot to liaison with the NSG training institute at Manesar near Gurgaon to send some of Punjab's best talents for exposure to the elite unit. Meanwhile, most top officers said their fingers are crossed to keep terrorists away
CHANDIGARH: Punjab is not a stranger to deadly terror strikes. In fact, it has one of the bloodiest histories of violence. But what if it were made
a target once again, as intelligence reports keep pointing out, especially keeping in mind the sheer volume of explosives including deadly consignments of RDX arms and ammunitions being constantly confiscated from its porous international borders?
Only God could save it as its police force battling lack of preparedness, old age and devoid of infrastructure, would be woefully wanting on all fronts. To start with, the state does not have a single Quick Reaction Team (QRT). Worse, most of the commandoes in the state's 5 commando battalions are well past the age of 35 as the last major recruitment was carried out way back in 1992.
The state has only one young commando unit which is the force's major strike arm, for which recruitment was done in early 2000. And this for a state which went through harrowing terror just over a decade back and has fringe elements lurking in the shadows to foment trouble.
``The threat is real, very real, especially since large RDX hauls have been routinely intercepted in the state,'' admitted a senior cop. Two major hauls in Ludhiana alone this year have yielded 59 kgs of RDX while a Khalistan Zindabad Force (KZF) consignment of arms, fake currency and RDX sent to Punjab to bump off the Dera Sacha Sauda chief Ram Rahim Singh was recently apprehended in two major raids at Amritsar and Ferozepur, both border areas.
But there is some movement in the lethargic police force and it has decided to send a team to Mumbai to study lessons learnt after the recent attack there. Two days back, DGP N S Aulakh ordered all district police chiefs to set up QRTs and the government has hurriedly approved 2,000 new vacancies for the ageing ranks.
``Something like Andhra Pradesh's Grey Hounds, an elite anti-terror force raised to deal with Naxals is what we ideally want, except that the new force has to be trained to deal with urban terror strikes,'' senior cops said.
Aulakh added, ``Security in the districts is being ramped up and the force is keeping an eye on all big hotels, malls, sensitive places et al and CCTVs are being installed at crowded places.''
The force has recently written to the Union government to release funds for buying equipment meant for disaster management, a non-existent concept in the state so far. Efforts are also afoot to liaison with the NSG training institute at Manesar near Gurgaon to send some of Punjab's best talents for exposure to the elite unit. Meanwhile, most top officers said their fingers are crossed to keep terrorists away
QUOTE OF THE DAY
Intelligence operatives to population ratio in India is less than 5 per lakh in India compared to above 40 in many countries - this, despite India being beset with multiple types of terror - Islamic, Kashmiri, Hindu, Sikh, north-east and Naxals - much more than only Islamic terror threat for the west, Russia, China etc.
The Ideologies of South Asian Jihadi Groups (Laskar-e-Taiba)
Hudson Institute ^ | 5/19/2005 | Hussain Haqqani
Posted on Monday, December 01, 2008 1:38:57 AM by mojito
The most significant jihadi group of Wahhabi persuasion is Lashkar-e-Taiba (The Army of the Pure) founded in 1989 by Hafiz Muhammad Saeed. Backed by Saudi money and protected by Pakistani intelligence services, Lashkar-e-Taiba became the military wing of Markaz al-Dawa wal-Irshad (Center for the Call to Righteousness). Saeed created a large campus and training facility at Muridke, outside the Pakistani metropolis of Lahore. After the U.S. froze Lashkar-e-Taiba’s assets and called for it to be banned, Saeed changed his organization’s name in Pakistan to Jamaat-ul-Dawa (the Society for Preaching). Pakistani authorities have been reluctant to move against either Lashkar, which continues to operate in Kashmir, or Jamaat-ul-Dawa, which operates freely in Pakistan. Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jamaat-ul-Dawa scaled down their military operations against India to help Pakistan honor its commitments to the U.S. and India. But Saeed remains free and continues to expand membership of his organization despite divisions in its leadership.
Under U.S. pressure, General Musharraf placed Jamaat-ul-Dawa on a watch list in November 2003.
Lashkar-e-Taiba has adopted a maximalist agenda for global jihad though its operations so far have been limited to Kashmir. The group justifies its ideology on the basis of the Quranic verse that says, “You are obligated to fight even though it is something you do not like” (2:216). Extrapolating from this verse, the group asserts that military jihad is a religious obligation for all Muslims. The group then defines the many circumstances in which that obligation must be carried out.
For example, a Markaz al-Dawa wal-Irshad publication titled Hum Jihad kyun Kar rahe hain? (Why Are We Waging Jihad?), declares the United States, Israel and India as existential enemies of Islam. It lists eight reasons for Jihad:
1) to eliminate evil and facilitate conversion to and practice of Islam; 2) to ensure the ascendancy of Islam; 3) to force non-Muslims to pay jizya (poll tax, paid by non-Muslims for protection from a Muslim ruler); 4) to assist the weak and powerless; 5) to avenge the blood of Muslims killed by unbelievers; 6) to punish enemies for breaking promises and treaties; 7) to defend a Muslim state; and 8) to liberate Muslim territories under non-Muslim occupation.
This list of itself is sufficient to justify a virtual state of permanent jihad. “Have all the obstacles to observing the faith in the world been removed?” the unnamed author asks rhetorically, adding that non-Muslim dominance of the global system makes jihad necessary. “Is the current world order that of kafirs (unbelievers) or of Muslims? Is the global economic system according to the wishes of Allah, which requires the end of interest and usury?” Jihad is described as essential to ensure ascendancy of Islam and to create circumstances whereby non-Muslims would either convert to Islam or pay jizya. Furthermore, all major powers have broken their pledges to Muslims made at one time or another, for which they must be punished, runs the argument. “Are Muslims not being mistreated all over the world? Are not weak Muslim men, women and children calling for help against oppression from India, Kashmir, Philippines, Chechnya, Russia, China, Bosnia and several other parts of the world? … Burma’s Muslims are under attack from Buddhists, who expel them from their homes … Israel has pierced the dagger of its existence in the heart of the Arabs.”
The Markaz/Lashkar/Jamaat-ul-Dawa movement construes Muslim territories under non-Muslim occupation in the broadest sense. “Muslims ruled Andalusia (Spain) for 800 years but they were finished to the last man. Christians now rule (Spain) and we must wrest it back from them. All of India, including Kashmir, Hyderabad, Assam, Nepal, Burma, Bihar and Junagadh were part of the Muslim empire that was lost because Muslims gave up jihad. Palestine is occupied by the Jews. The Holy Qibla-e-Awwal (First Center of Prayer) in Jerusalem is under Jewish control. Several countries such as Bulgaria, Hungary, Cyprus, Sicily, Ethiopia, Russian Turkistan and Chinese Turkistan … were Muslim lands and it is our duty to get these back from unbelievers. Even parts of France reaching 90 kilometers outside Paris and some of the forests and mountains of Switzerland were home to Muslim mujahidin but are now under the occupation of unbelievers.”
Some of the arguments and claims might appear historically incorrect or practically impossible but this does and will not deter a closely-knit jihadi group from raising funds, organizing cadres and fielding militants or terrorists in pursuit of a broadly defined global jihad aimed at the revival of Islam’s global ascendancy and eventual domination.
Posted on Monday, December 01, 2008 1:38:57 AM by mojito
The most significant jihadi group of Wahhabi persuasion is Lashkar-e-Taiba (The Army of the Pure) founded in 1989 by Hafiz Muhammad Saeed. Backed by Saudi money and protected by Pakistani intelligence services, Lashkar-e-Taiba became the military wing of Markaz al-Dawa wal-Irshad (Center for the Call to Righteousness). Saeed created a large campus and training facility at Muridke, outside the Pakistani metropolis of Lahore. After the U.S. froze Lashkar-e-Taiba’s assets and called for it to be banned, Saeed changed his organization’s name in Pakistan to Jamaat-ul-Dawa (the Society for Preaching). Pakistani authorities have been reluctant to move against either Lashkar, which continues to operate in Kashmir, or Jamaat-ul-Dawa, which operates freely in Pakistan. Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jamaat-ul-Dawa scaled down their military operations against India to help Pakistan honor its commitments to the U.S. and India. But Saeed remains free and continues to expand membership of his organization despite divisions in its leadership.
Under U.S. pressure, General Musharraf placed Jamaat-ul-Dawa on a watch list in November 2003.
Lashkar-e-Taiba has adopted a maximalist agenda for global jihad though its operations so far have been limited to Kashmir. The group justifies its ideology on the basis of the Quranic verse that says, “You are obligated to fight even though it is something you do not like” (2:216). Extrapolating from this verse, the group asserts that military jihad is a religious obligation for all Muslims. The group then defines the many circumstances in which that obligation must be carried out.
For example, a Markaz al-Dawa wal-Irshad publication titled Hum Jihad kyun Kar rahe hain? (Why Are We Waging Jihad?), declares the United States, Israel and India as existential enemies of Islam. It lists eight reasons for Jihad:
1) to eliminate evil and facilitate conversion to and practice of Islam; 2) to ensure the ascendancy of Islam; 3) to force non-Muslims to pay jizya (poll tax, paid by non-Muslims for protection from a Muslim ruler); 4) to assist the weak and powerless; 5) to avenge the blood of Muslims killed by unbelievers; 6) to punish enemies for breaking promises and treaties; 7) to defend a Muslim state; and 8) to liberate Muslim territories under non-Muslim occupation.
This list of itself is sufficient to justify a virtual state of permanent jihad. “Have all the obstacles to observing the faith in the world been removed?” the unnamed author asks rhetorically, adding that non-Muslim dominance of the global system makes jihad necessary. “Is the current world order that of kafirs (unbelievers) or of Muslims? Is the global economic system according to the wishes of Allah, which requires the end of interest and usury?” Jihad is described as essential to ensure ascendancy of Islam and to create circumstances whereby non-Muslims would either convert to Islam or pay jizya. Furthermore, all major powers have broken their pledges to Muslims made at one time or another, for which they must be punished, runs the argument. “Are Muslims not being mistreated all over the world? Are not weak Muslim men, women and children calling for help against oppression from India, Kashmir, Philippines, Chechnya, Russia, China, Bosnia and several other parts of the world? … Burma’s Muslims are under attack from Buddhists, who expel them from their homes … Israel has pierced the dagger of its existence in the heart of the Arabs.”
The Markaz/Lashkar/Jamaat-ul-Dawa movement construes Muslim territories under non-Muslim occupation in the broadest sense. “Muslims ruled Andalusia (Spain) for 800 years but they were finished to the last man. Christians now rule (Spain) and we must wrest it back from them. All of India, including Kashmir, Hyderabad, Assam, Nepal, Burma, Bihar and Junagadh were part of the Muslim empire that was lost because Muslims gave up jihad. Palestine is occupied by the Jews. The Holy Qibla-e-Awwal (First Center of Prayer) in Jerusalem is under Jewish control. Several countries such as Bulgaria, Hungary, Cyprus, Sicily, Ethiopia, Russian Turkistan and Chinese Turkistan … were Muslim lands and it is our duty to get these back from unbelievers. Even parts of France reaching 90 kilometers outside Paris and some of the forests and mountains of Switzerland were home to Muslim mujahidin but are now under the occupation of unbelievers.”
Some of the arguments and claims might appear historically incorrect or practically impossible but this does and will not deter a closely-knit jihadi group from raising funds, organizing cadres and fielding militants or terrorists in pursuit of a broadly defined global jihad aimed at the revival of Islam’s global ascendancy and eventual domination.
Mumbai 26/11: Media Misadventurisms
By Swati Parashar
The media tirade continues while politicians engage in mud-slinging. They (politicians) pull out ‘conscience’ to justify resignations, like rabbit out of the hat (R R Patil who earlier refused to resign, suddenly found his ‘conscience’ today!). They show utter contempt for us, common people, supposedly in ‘powder and lipstick’ and in ‘ties and suits’, who dare to question them (Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi thinks those protesting against politicians are anti-nationals!). And some others write blogs about their bravery (Milind Deora is probably miffed that his and his party men’s bravery in saving people near Nariman House was not recognised!). These politicians have competition from our media which has become the judge, jury and executioner especially after the Mumbai terror tragedy. It is important to illustrate the media misadventures. They are all speaking ‘for’ us, ‘with’ us and ‘of’ us while we remain speechless. They are supposedly giving us a ‘voice’, rather giving themselves and some of their chosen ones the voice.
Most of the television anchors sound more like street hawkers shouting ‘breaking news’, ‘exclusive to our channel’, ‘the very first time on television’ etc. This kind of language offensive from the media, which had turned the Mumbai terror tragedy into a live reality show, makes the language problem of politicians like R R Patil and Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi seem less disturbing. Times Now anchor, Arnab Goswami, displays the Mumbai Mirror newspaper and reads out details of the arrested terrorist from the paper without ever once mentioning that it was their sister publication. Novel way of marketing! Former and serving officers of the security forces offer almost live commentaries of the counter terrorist operations. Surely, these media channels would add to the mirth of the planners and patrons of these gruesome attacks? The question is, why is the media so attention seeking at the expense of security and dignity of precious human lives?
Is there a Government in place or do we only have agents of these various media outlets at every nook and corner of our state establishment and institutions? Why has the media taken up the role of a spy agency? Media is dutifully informed by their ‘reliable sources’ about every syllable uttered in the interrogation of the captured terrorist, the action plan during the NSG operation and investigative and preventive measures in the aftermath of the attacks. Even before any charges could be laid in the Malegaon blasts, for instance, the ATS investigations were ‘accessible’ to the media, too ready to pounce on half-truths, speculations and may be innuendos. Why should media have access to such sensitive and confidential details in any ongoing investigation? ‘ATS officer said’, ‘investigating sources suggested’, ‘reliable sources revealed’ are some of the common phrases used by the media. We have to send out a strong message: we do not want the media to jeopardise such important investigations. We believe that there are investigative agencies and judicial institutions in this country that are capable of doing their job.
The pertinent questions are; how much should the media know? How much should they reveal? The lack of media ethics has come out very strongly in the Mumbai case. During the commando operations at Nariman House and at the Taj Hotel, the running commentary by the media was a sad commentary on the irresponsible media itself. Crass self obsession, self-promotion and sensationalism at its worst! There are reasons to believe that the lives of hostages and security personnel were compromised by the media who continued to give out unsolicited details of people trapped in the Taj and Oberoi hotels and in Nariman House. Apparently, the terrorists had set up control rooms in the two hotels and were equipped with sophisticated satellite phones and communication devices. If such was the case, then our own media was providing intelligence to the terrorists through their detailed reporting of the commando operation and by giving details of hostages in these places. One of the objectives of these kinds of modern day terrorist operations is to generate publicity. Therefore, the terrorists in the recent Mumbai attacks owe a lot to the Indian media!
What kind of media ‘ethics’ or humane concerns for the lives of people, made the journalists ask outrageous questions to the freed hostages or to their relatives outside? The amateurs followed their veterans like Barkha Dutt who wanted to know how an anxious wife ‘felt’ about her husband trapped inside or what she would do if she didn’t hear from her husband. But the prize for the best question should have gone to the anchor who asked a freed hostage, how it felt to be one! I have to confess that I was dreading the worst; microphones thrust into faces of dead bodies being asked how they felt to be dead! The victims did not receive any privacy in their death too. Media cameras followed dead bodies in ambulances from Nariman House and the channels competed with each other to repeat these visuals.
Despite the hyper activity of the media, to make sure nothing escapes our notice, there was no mention of some of the valiant police men who were responsible for capturing the lone surviving terrorist. I salute those police men, not only for their courage and acumen but also for shying away from the media glare. Or may be ‘regular’ police men are too much low down in the glamour list of the media. The same media giving such detailed descriptions of the operations in the Taj and Oberoi Hotels and in Nariman House had no time to visit the CST railway station to cover the victims there. As Gnani Sankaran, a Chennai based writer aptly argues, the elitist media had no time for “the thirty odd dead bodies strewn all over the platform of CST. No Barkha Dutt went there to tell us who they were. But she was at the Taj to show us the damaged furniture and reception lobby braving the guards. And the TV cameras did not go to the government run JJ hospital to find out who those 26 unidentified bodies were.” No self reflection for the media here!
Those who deride and denounce the politicians on our behalf are playing politics at our expense. Rajdeep Sardesai on CNN-IBN invited Sharad Pawar, of all the people, to talk about the fallout of Mumbai attacks. May be, either Sharad Pawar does not have a serious language problem or that he is the best security expert from the government side. Kerala Chief Minister, Mr. Achuthanandan, known for his short temper, was outraged by Major Unnikrishnan’s father’s refusal to accept his condolence visit. The Kerala CM used the most offensive and insulting language to criticise the martyr’s father which was duly reported across the media. His statement has outraged the Indian public. Rajdeep Sardesai, however, managed to find a Malayalam language expert among his reporters to explain that a senior and respected CPM leader like Mr. Achuthanandan would never use such foul language. Rajdeep, we understand the need to cultivate political connections, as also to undermine rival TV channels but your defence of the Kerala CM’s choice of words is simply appalling.
There is a glut of news items, analyses, panel discussions and cross continental feeds 24X7 but the question remains: why is the media so publicity hungry? In one of the TV debates, Pakistani journalist, Hamid Mir argued that the people of Pakistan refuse to believe that the Mumbai terror attack has any Pakistani connection, simply because the “Indian media” has been reporting about Col. Purohit and ‘Hindutva’ forces’ involvement in the Samjhauta Express and the Malegaon blasts. There has been neither conclusive investigation nor evidence to indict Col Purohit or the Saffron brigade, at least not as yet. However, the Indian media’s relentless campaign to establish their own ‘secular credentials, has provided a very convenient ruse to Pakistan to deny any role in the Mumbai carnage. Our Indian media, therefore, has not just helped terrorists during their operations but it has also provided excuses for the denials across the border.
The media is always keen to turn the spotlight on people, but it is about time we turn the spotlight on them. They have let us down as much as our politicians.
‘Don’t shoot the messenger’ but what about the messenger who is “shooting”?
(Swati Parashar is a PhD candidate at the Department of Politics and International Relations, Lancaster University, UK. She can be contacted at swatiparashar@hotmail.com)
Dial de facto Prime Minister for terror
But what about the Prime Minister?
A Surya Prakash Tuesday, December 2, 2008
The pall of gloom and shame that enveloped the nation in the immediate aftermath of the audacious terrorist attack on Mumbai last week has since given way to unprecedented anger across the country over the deliberate and criminal neglect of national security by the United Progressive Alliance. Unable to cope with the heat, the coalition has quickly dumped Home Minister Shivraj Patil and is promising to slay a few more scapegoats at the altar of public opinion in the hope that these ministerial and bureaucratic 'executions' will douse public wrath.
The people at large, however, should not fall for the bait and lower their guard because the relief that these 'sacrifices' will provide us will only be temporary and cosmetic. As everyone is aware, the ruling coalition and the Congress which heads it are simply unwilling to tackle the original sin that has brought this great nation to its knees, namely the mistaken notion that they can consolidate Muslim votes if they go slow on Muslim terrorists. Nor is it ready to punish the original sinners -- the persons who preside over the coalition and the Government and thus dictate and execute policies that have brought things to such a pass.
The country has become vulnerable to repeated terrorist strikes because of the diabolical and cynical pursuit of vote-bank politics by this coalition since it came to power in May 2004. Here are a few examples of the UPA's blinkered approach and the crass vote chase that some of its leading lights have been indulging in: The Government repeals POTA and holds back clearance of anti-terror laws enacted by Gujarat and Rajasthan; Union Ministers and leading politicians associated with the ruling coalition fall one over the other to empathise with families of persons arrested in connection with the terrorist attacks in Ahmedabad; UPA Ministers and politicians question the integrity of Delhi Police and describe the encounter between the police and terrorists at Jamia Nagar as "fake" despite the martyrdom of a police officer; the Government stands on false prestige even after hundreds of citizens are killed in terrorist bombings and rejects advice to bring in strong, deterrent legal measures to combat terrorism; a Union Minister demands citizenship rights for 20 million illegal immigrants from Bangladesh who pose a threat to the nation's safety and security; and finally, in a desperate bid to clinch the Muslim vote before the next Lok Sabha election, the Government turns away from the real threat to national security and dissipates its energies and resources chasing the chimera of 'Hindu terror'.
The UPA has let us down on many counts. The coalition is so fixated on Muslim votes that it jettisoned POTA simply because this law had been introduced by the BJP. Egged on by a small bunch of pseudo-secularists whose hearts bleed only for terrorists and secessionists, the UPA coalition also took the fateful decision to deny states like Gujarat and Rajasthan the right to frame stringent anti-terrorism laws. The BJP has pointedly asked, and rightly so, as to how it is legitimate for the Congress-led Government in Maharashtra to have a strong anti-terrorism law like MCOCA, but it is illegitimate for Gujarat and Rajasthan to have an identical law. Similarly, although MCOCA was extended to Delhi in 2002, why is it not used against the accused in terrorism cases in Delhi? How is it that MCOCA is used against Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and other accused in the Malegaon blast but the same law is not applied to persons arrested on terrorism charges in the Capital?
Further, the Prime Minister and the Congress president are so obsessed with the minority vote that they have even shelved the advice of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission -- headed by a senior Congressman, Mr Veerappa Moily -- that the Union Government should bring in a stringent anti-terror law. It declared last June that extraordinary crimes like terrorism "require extraordinary provisions" and investigators and prosecutors need to be empowered with "stringent legal provisions" in regard to investigation, bail and trial.
This issue was raised after the Indian Mujahideen conducted a terrorist strike in New Delhi last September in which 25 people were killed and dozens of others were injured. But both the Prime Minister and the Congress president are adamant. They got one of their senior Ministers to debunk the 'Moily Report' and falsely claim that India has stronger anti-terrorism laws than the US and the UK! The ARC also recommended a federal agency to combat terrorism. It said the CBI should be reconstituted as the Central Bureau of Intelligence and Investigation with a separate Anti-Terrorism Division.
Needless to say, the people are paying a heavy price for the Government's reluctance to act on the report of its own ARC. Yet another unpleasant example of minority appeasement degenerating into terrorist appeasement is the manner in which the Government is dragging its feet on the hanging of Mohammad Afzal Guru, who has been sentenced to death for his involvement in the terrorist attack on Parliament House. Why has he not been sent to the gallows? Because the Congress thinks that it will lose Muslim votes if it does so!
The nation has been subject to regular and outrageous serial strikes by terrorists over the last few years. There were many incidents when the BJP was in power. There have been many more after the UPA took charge. So, where is the difference? The difference is that while both Governments have presided over an incompetent security apparatus, the latter must take the blame for sending out all the wrong signals and discouraging anti-terrorist initiatives by the security forces. The difference is one of intentions (niyat). The intentions of the present Government are not genuine. It appears ready to sacrifice the lives of innocent citizens, in order to keep alive a so-called vote-bank. The responsibility for this rests squarely on the shoulders of the Prime Minister and the UPA chairperson who is the de facto Prime Minister. They must be held accountable for all the lives lost in Ahmedabad, Jaipur, Bangalore, New Delhi, Mumbai and elsewhere, and for putting us to shame before the international community. They should not be allowed to shift the blame onto some scapegoats. If we do not quickly ease out the real culprits from their seats of power, public fury may consume all that we hold dear -- our civilisational ethos, our democratic way of life and our Constitution. We should not allow this to happen.
http://dailypioneer.com/138549/But-what-about-the-Prime-Minister.html
Inflicting wounds on patriotism
M Rama Jois Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Hindus world over have remained loyal to the country they live in and have never indulged in any anti-national activities. The term 'Hindu terrorism' maligns the community
The statement made by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to the effect that assigning the name of any religion to any of the terrorist activities was wrong, is very timely. The statement is of utmost importance being in the interest of maintaining the feelings of different religions and is full of wisdom. This advice by the Prime Minister should be followed by all political parties and the print and electronic media without any prejudice. Such a code of conduct is absolutely necessary to be followed in the interest of unity and integrity of the nation.
However, unfortunately, in respect of an incident which took place in Malegoan on September 8, 2006, some politicians and the print and electronic media have been describing the incident as "Hindu terrorism" and on that basis huge propaganda is being made. After a careful examination of this kind of propaganda, it is crystal clear that those who are making such allegation have not realised the enormous injury they are inflicting on national unity, feeling of fraternity and the desire to live harmoniously, among the people belonging to different religions.
Before Malegaon there were deadly terrorist attacks perpetrated by anti-national elements in Jammu & Kashmir, New Delhi, Jaipur and Ahmedabad and other cities. Apart from mass casualty, there was also colossal loss to property.
It is the foremost duty of a State to give protection to its people. The Central and State Governments have been unable to prevent such activities and afford protection to innocent people. These incidents have caused mental agony to a large number of citizens. If such inhuman and anti-national activities caused provocation to a few persons to retaliate on account of anger and agony, they cannot be dubbed as terrorists. Malegaon incident is one such retaliation for anti-national terrorist activities.
On the other hand, these are only patriotic retaliation for anti-national terrorist activities. To describe such activities as 'Hindu terrorism' is to add insult to injury. The damage caused to the nation by those who are indulging in making such propaganda is much more than the damage caused by terrorist activities. Consequence of this is disastrous to the reputation and interest of the nation.
In this land of Mahatma Gandhi, it is unfortunate that a few individuals have developed the expertise in the quality of suppressing the truth and suggesting falsehood. There are examples galore to prove that. The most cruel example of this is to coin the phrase 'Hindu terrorism' after Malegaon blast probe became public. This is an injury inflicted on peace-loving people who always believed in "Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinah (let all be happy) and Loka Samasta Sukhinobhavantu (let the entire World be happy) as part of their dharma. Hindus, as the whole world knows, are peace-loving people and by nature never inflict any injury against co-human beings just for the sake of satisfying their hatredness towards other religion and they do not indulge in violence against them. Even now Hindus are living in as many as 60-70 countries throughout the world. They have remained loyal to the country where they live in and have not indulged in any anti-national activities.
During the freedom struggle, Mahatma Gandhi adopted the path of non-violence. However, there were people who were charged with sense of patriotism such as Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev, Madanlal Dhingra, Chandrashekhar Azad, Satyendra Basu and Chapekar Brothers. In the course of their struggle for freedom, they adopted the path of revolutionaries with the object of attacking the foreign invader and rulers. Just as it is the height of perversity to call such patriots as terrorists, it is also equally perverse to dub persons like Pragya Singh Thakur and her supporters as terrorists and malign the entire Hindu society by calling it as 'Hindu terrorism'.
According to the criminal jurisprudence, no person can be considered or declared to be guilty until he is convicted by a court of law for the offences alleged against him/her. Even on the basis that Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and her supporters have committed the offence falling under the Penal Code, when we consider as to why they had done so, it becomes clear that they were provoked by the large number of killings by several terrorist attacks committed by anti-national individuals. It was only a patriotic retaliation to anti-national terrorism.
Such activities done by certain individuals on account of patriotic fervour and due to provocation provided by anti-national terrorists canot be brought under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Acts. Such a step taken is wholly arbitrary and unreasonable. This is nothing but part of vote-bank politics which is being used in view of the fact that elections are being held in some States of north India. This is nothing but a political tool to divide and rule the nation.
-- The writer is a Rajya Sabha Member and Former Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court and former Governor of Jharkhand and Bihar.
http://dailypioneer.com/138558/Inflicting-wounds-on-patriotism.html
Too little, too late
The Pioneer Edit Desk Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Along with Patil, UPA must go
The Prime Minister, the Congress and its allies in the UPA are welcome to believe that the resignations of Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil and Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister RR Patil, as well as the anticipated exit of Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh, amount to sufficient and appropriate action to assuage a nation seething with rage after last week's terrorist attack on Mumbai. But the reality does not match their warped, cynical perception: Only the naïve and those who are not moved by the slaughter which has made the Government appear too weak to protect its citizens would commend what is clearly too little too late. More importantly, these resignations do not address the real issues that have been brought to the fore by the bloody siege of Mumbai, though not for the first time. For instance, it is abundantly clear now that the latest attack on Mumbai could have been staved off had there not been a colossal failure on part of the Union Government, the State Government and agencies of the state in processing intelligence inputs and information that indicated towards an imminent terrorist strike on the country's financial capital. This is not the first time that the Prime Minister and his now sacked Home Minister miserably failed to act swiftly and decisively on the basis of information collated by intelligence agencies. It also needs to be pointed out that while Mr Shivraj Patil made a spectacle of his incompetence and reduced himself to an object of pitiless ridicule while in office, the Prime Minister did not so much as bother to seek an explanation from him for the Home Ministry's terrible track record in addressing India's primary internal security concern. That terrorists should be running amok from Kashmir to Kerala and striking without any let or hindrance is as much a reflection of the Home Minister's shocking failure as the Prime Minister's callous indifference.
Indeed, Mr Manmohan Singh cannot distance himself from the principle of collective responsibility, nor can he disown the fact that the National Security Adviser, to whom the intelligence agencies have been reporting ever since the UPA came to power, is a key member of his core team. We must also not forget that the Prime Minister spent his first 100 days in office dismantling the anti-terrorism mechanism put together by the NDA; it is laughable that in his last 100 days in office he should promise tough measures to fight terrorism. In a sense, the entire UPA is to blame for the sorry state of affairs that prevails on the national security front. Had it not been for the UPA diluting the Government's stand on terrorism and signalling that the days of tough response to acts of terror were over, prompted by the politics of minorityism and the crass appeasement of fanatics by the Congress and its allies in the hope of consolidating Muslim votes in their favour,jihadis would not have targeted India with increasing impunity. The UPA's monumental failure to protect the lives of the country's citizens cannot be covered up by sacking the Home Minister and Maharashtra's Chief Minister and his deputy. That would be too insignificant a price to pay for the terrible waste of lives and the hideous destruction witnessed over the past four-and-a-half years. This regime has let down the people of India; it is obsessed with power at any cost. It must go.
http://dailypioneer.com/138552/Too-little-too-late.html
Dial Congress for terror
Hilda Raja Tuesday, December 2, 2008
With no UPA allies condemning the Mumbai holocaust the silence maintained by Mr Lalu Prasad Yadav, Mr Ram Vilas Paswan, Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav and the otherwise eloquent Left parties exposes their vested interest of not losing Muslim votes. With Israel slamming India for the lack of sufficient intelligence inputs and a hurried assault by the NSG and the Navy commandos that resulted in the death of maximum hostages, the blame game between the various agencies has already begun.
The attack on the Taj Mahal Hotel, aiming to strike at our heritage and growing financial clout, is a bleak reminder of the Parliament attack which should have made the Government (irrespective of the parties in power) take serious note as the terrorists had dared to attack the very seat of our democracy in which rests the sovereignty of the people. Emboldening the terrorists was the fact that the warnings about the impending attack were not heeded.
The crucial question is what was the UPA Government doing since it came to power? The number of serial bombings across the country should have put it on high alert. But the Congress and its allies were busy with their political ambitions of coming back to power.
In the disguise of renunciation of the post of Prime Minister, Congress president Sonia Gandhi instituted a co-ordination committee and became its chairperson. Though the panel is defunct she remains the National Advisory Council chairperson allowing her to attend every Cabinet meeting and thus in her we have a de facto Prime Minister and a power centre at 10 Janpath.
The extravagant expenditure on the security of politicians must be diverted to modernise our national security forces. Those who want power must be prepared to face self-injected insecurity. The Mumbai massacre is a bugle call to all nationalists and patriots to end the rule of the Congress.
The nation cannot be taken for a ride any more. The Congress must be banished along with all its political buffoons who have segmented and divided the people into ghettos of creed and caste, and sat back to pontificate their hollow words of consolation while innocent people were massacred on the streets. The Congress's hand is smeared with the blood of innocent people.
http://dailypioneer.com/138547/Dial-Congress-for-terror.html
A Surya Prakash Tuesday, December 2, 2008
The pall of gloom and shame that enveloped the nation in the immediate aftermath of the audacious terrorist attack on Mumbai last week has since given way to unprecedented anger across the country over the deliberate and criminal neglect of national security by the United Progressive Alliance. Unable to cope with the heat, the coalition has quickly dumped Home Minister Shivraj Patil and is promising to slay a few more scapegoats at the altar of public opinion in the hope that these ministerial and bureaucratic 'executions' will douse public wrath.
The people at large, however, should not fall for the bait and lower their guard because the relief that these 'sacrifices' will provide us will only be temporary and cosmetic. As everyone is aware, the ruling coalition and the Congress which heads it are simply unwilling to tackle the original sin that has brought this great nation to its knees, namely the mistaken notion that they can consolidate Muslim votes if they go slow on Muslim terrorists. Nor is it ready to punish the original sinners -- the persons who preside over the coalition and the Government and thus dictate and execute policies that have brought things to such a pass.
The country has become vulnerable to repeated terrorist strikes because of the diabolical and cynical pursuit of vote-bank politics by this coalition since it came to power in May 2004. Here are a few examples of the UPA's blinkered approach and the crass vote chase that some of its leading lights have been indulging in: The Government repeals POTA and holds back clearance of anti-terror laws enacted by Gujarat and Rajasthan; Union Ministers and leading politicians associated with the ruling coalition fall one over the other to empathise with families of persons arrested in connection with the terrorist attacks in Ahmedabad; UPA Ministers and politicians question the integrity of Delhi Police and describe the encounter between the police and terrorists at Jamia Nagar as "fake" despite the martyrdom of a police officer; the Government stands on false prestige even after hundreds of citizens are killed in terrorist bombings and rejects advice to bring in strong, deterrent legal measures to combat terrorism; a Union Minister demands citizenship rights for 20 million illegal immigrants from Bangladesh who pose a threat to the nation's safety and security; and finally, in a desperate bid to clinch the Muslim vote before the next Lok Sabha election, the Government turns away from the real threat to national security and dissipates its energies and resources chasing the chimera of 'Hindu terror'.
The UPA has let us down on many counts. The coalition is so fixated on Muslim votes that it jettisoned POTA simply because this law had been introduced by the BJP. Egged on by a small bunch of pseudo-secularists whose hearts bleed only for terrorists and secessionists, the UPA coalition also took the fateful decision to deny states like Gujarat and Rajasthan the right to frame stringent anti-terrorism laws. The BJP has pointedly asked, and rightly so, as to how it is legitimate for the Congress-led Government in Maharashtra to have a strong anti-terrorism law like MCOCA, but it is illegitimate for Gujarat and Rajasthan to have an identical law. Similarly, although MCOCA was extended to Delhi in 2002, why is it not used against the accused in terrorism cases in Delhi? How is it that MCOCA is used against Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and other accused in the Malegaon blast but the same law is not applied to persons arrested on terrorism charges in the Capital?
Further, the Prime Minister and the Congress president are so obsessed with the minority vote that they have even shelved the advice of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission -- headed by a senior Congressman, Mr Veerappa Moily -- that the Union Government should bring in a stringent anti-terror law. It declared last June that extraordinary crimes like terrorism "require extraordinary provisions" and investigators and prosecutors need to be empowered with "stringent legal provisions" in regard to investigation, bail and trial.
This issue was raised after the Indian Mujahideen conducted a terrorist strike in New Delhi last September in which 25 people were killed and dozens of others were injured. But both the Prime Minister and the Congress president are adamant. They got one of their senior Ministers to debunk the 'Moily Report' and falsely claim that India has stronger anti-terrorism laws than the US and the UK! The ARC also recommended a federal agency to combat terrorism. It said the CBI should be reconstituted as the Central Bureau of Intelligence and Investigation with a separate Anti-Terrorism Division.
Needless to say, the people are paying a heavy price for the Government's reluctance to act on the report of its own ARC. Yet another unpleasant example of minority appeasement degenerating into terrorist appeasement is the manner in which the Government is dragging its feet on the hanging of Mohammad Afzal Guru, who has been sentenced to death for his involvement in the terrorist attack on Parliament House. Why has he not been sent to the gallows? Because the Congress thinks that it will lose Muslim votes if it does so!
The nation has been subject to regular and outrageous serial strikes by terrorists over the last few years. There were many incidents when the BJP was in power. There have been many more after the UPA took charge. So, where is the difference? The difference is that while both Governments have presided over an incompetent security apparatus, the latter must take the blame for sending out all the wrong signals and discouraging anti-terrorist initiatives by the security forces. The difference is one of intentions (niyat). The intentions of the present Government are not genuine. It appears ready to sacrifice the lives of innocent citizens, in order to keep alive a so-called vote-bank. The responsibility for this rests squarely on the shoulders of the Prime Minister and the UPA chairperson who is the de facto Prime Minister. They must be held accountable for all the lives lost in Ahmedabad, Jaipur, Bangalore, New Delhi, Mumbai and elsewhere, and for putting us to shame before the international community. They should not be allowed to shift the blame onto some scapegoats. If we do not quickly ease out the real culprits from their seats of power, public fury may consume all that we hold dear -- our civilisational ethos, our democratic way of life and our Constitution. We should not allow this to happen.
http://dailypioneer.com/138549/But-what-about-the-Prime-Minister.html
Inflicting wounds on patriotism
M Rama Jois Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Hindus world over have remained loyal to the country they live in and have never indulged in any anti-national activities. The term 'Hindu terrorism' maligns the community
The statement made by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to the effect that assigning the name of any religion to any of the terrorist activities was wrong, is very timely. The statement is of utmost importance being in the interest of maintaining the feelings of different religions and is full of wisdom. This advice by the Prime Minister should be followed by all political parties and the print and electronic media without any prejudice. Such a code of conduct is absolutely necessary to be followed in the interest of unity and integrity of the nation.
However, unfortunately, in respect of an incident which took place in Malegoan on September 8, 2006, some politicians and the print and electronic media have been describing the incident as "Hindu terrorism" and on that basis huge propaganda is being made. After a careful examination of this kind of propaganda, it is crystal clear that those who are making such allegation have not realised the enormous injury they are inflicting on national unity, feeling of fraternity and the desire to live harmoniously, among the people belonging to different religions.
Before Malegaon there were deadly terrorist attacks perpetrated by anti-national elements in Jammu & Kashmir, New Delhi, Jaipur and Ahmedabad and other cities. Apart from mass casualty, there was also colossal loss to property.
It is the foremost duty of a State to give protection to its people. The Central and State Governments have been unable to prevent such activities and afford protection to innocent people. These incidents have caused mental agony to a large number of citizens. If such inhuman and anti-national activities caused provocation to a few persons to retaliate on account of anger and agony, they cannot be dubbed as terrorists. Malegaon incident is one such retaliation for anti-national terrorist activities.
On the other hand, these are only patriotic retaliation for anti-national terrorist activities. To describe such activities as 'Hindu terrorism' is to add insult to injury. The damage caused to the nation by those who are indulging in making such propaganda is much more than the damage caused by terrorist activities. Consequence of this is disastrous to the reputation and interest of the nation.
In this land of Mahatma Gandhi, it is unfortunate that a few individuals have developed the expertise in the quality of suppressing the truth and suggesting falsehood. There are examples galore to prove that. The most cruel example of this is to coin the phrase 'Hindu terrorism' after Malegaon blast probe became public. This is an injury inflicted on peace-loving people who always believed in "Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinah (let all be happy) and Loka Samasta Sukhinobhavantu (let the entire World be happy) as part of their dharma. Hindus, as the whole world knows, are peace-loving people and by nature never inflict any injury against co-human beings just for the sake of satisfying their hatredness towards other religion and they do not indulge in violence against them. Even now Hindus are living in as many as 60-70 countries throughout the world. They have remained loyal to the country where they live in and have not indulged in any anti-national activities.
During the freedom struggle, Mahatma Gandhi adopted the path of non-violence. However, there were people who were charged with sense of patriotism such as Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev, Madanlal Dhingra, Chandrashekhar Azad, Satyendra Basu and Chapekar Brothers. In the course of their struggle for freedom, they adopted the path of revolutionaries with the object of attacking the foreign invader and rulers. Just as it is the height of perversity to call such patriots as terrorists, it is also equally perverse to dub persons like Pragya Singh Thakur and her supporters as terrorists and malign the entire Hindu society by calling it as 'Hindu terrorism'.
According to the criminal jurisprudence, no person can be considered or declared to be guilty until he is convicted by a court of law for the offences alleged against him/her. Even on the basis that Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and her supporters have committed the offence falling under the Penal Code, when we consider as to why they had done so, it becomes clear that they were provoked by the large number of killings by several terrorist attacks committed by anti-national individuals. It was only a patriotic retaliation to anti-national terrorism.
Such activities done by certain individuals on account of patriotic fervour and due to provocation provided by anti-national terrorists canot be brought under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Acts. Such a step taken is wholly arbitrary and unreasonable. This is nothing but part of vote-bank politics which is being used in view of the fact that elections are being held in some States of north India. This is nothing but a political tool to divide and rule the nation.
-- The writer is a Rajya Sabha Member and Former Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court and former Governor of Jharkhand and Bihar.
http://dailypioneer.com/138558/Inflicting-wounds-on-patriotism.html
Too little, too late
The Pioneer Edit Desk Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Along with Patil, UPA must go
The Prime Minister, the Congress and its allies in the UPA are welcome to believe that the resignations of Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil and Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister RR Patil, as well as the anticipated exit of Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh, amount to sufficient and appropriate action to assuage a nation seething with rage after last week's terrorist attack on Mumbai. But the reality does not match their warped, cynical perception: Only the naïve and those who are not moved by the slaughter which has made the Government appear too weak to protect its citizens would commend what is clearly too little too late. More importantly, these resignations do not address the real issues that have been brought to the fore by the bloody siege of Mumbai, though not for the first time. For instance, it is abundantly clear now that the latest attack on Mumbai could have been staved off had there not been a colossal failure on part of the Union Government, the State Government and agencies of the state in processing intelligence inputs and information that indicated towards an imminent terrorist strike on the country's financial capital. This is not the first time that the Prime Minister and his now sacked Home Minister miserably failed to act swiftly and decisively on the basis of information collated by intelligence agencies. It also needs to be pointed out that while Mr Shivraj Patil made a spectacle of his incompetence and reduced himself to an object of pitiless ridicule while in office, the Prime Minister did not so much as bother to seek an explanation from him for the Home Ministry's terrible track record in addressing India's primary internal security concern. That terrorists should be running amok from Kashmir to Kerala and striking without any let or hindrance is as much a reflection of the Home Minister's shocking failure as the Prime Minister's callous indifference.
Indeed, Mr Manmohan Singh cannot distance himself from the principle of collective responsibility, nor can he disown the fact that the National Security Adviser, to whom the intelligence agencies have been reporting ever since the UPA came to power, is a key member of his core team. We must also not forget that the Prime Minister spent his first 100 days in office dismantling the anti-terrorism mechanism put together by the NDA; it is laughable that in his last 100 days in office he should promise tough measures to fight terrorism. In a sense, the entire UPA is to blame for the sorry state of affairs that prevails on the national security front. Had it not been for the UPA diluting the Government's stand on terrorism and signalling that the days of tough response to acts of terror were over, prompted by the politics of minorityism and the crass appeasement of fanatics by the Congress and its allies in the hope of consolidating Muslim votes in their favour,jihadis would not have targeted India with increasing impunity. The UPA's monumental failure to protect the lives of the country's citizens cannot be covered up by sacking the Home Minister and Maharashtra's Chief Minister and his deputy. That would be too insignificant a price to pay for the terrible waste of lives and the hideous destruction witnessed over the past four-and-a-half years. This regime has let down the people of India; it is obsessed with power at any cost. It must go.
http://dailypioneer.com/138552/Too-little-too-late.html
Dial Congress for terror
Hilda Raja Tuesday, December 2, 2008
With no UPA allies condemning the Mumbai holocaust the silence maintained by Mr Lalu Prasad Yadav, Mr Ram Vilas Paswan, Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav and the otherwise eloquent Left parties exposes their vested interest of not losing Muslim votes. With Israel slamming India for the lack of sufficient intelligence inputs and a hurried assault by the NSG and the Navy commandos that resulted in the death of maximum hostages, the blame game between the various agencies has already begun.
The attack on the Taj Mahal Hotel, aiming to strike at our heritage and growing financial clout, is a bleak reminder of the Parliament attack which should have made the Government (irrespective of the parties in power) take serious note as the terrorists had dared to attack the very seat of our democracy in which rests the sovereignty of the people. Emboldening the terrorists was the fact that the warnings about the impending attack were not heeded.
The crucial question is what was the UPA Government doing since it came to power? The number of serial bombings across the country should have put it on high alert. But the Congress and its allies were busy with their political ambitions of coming back to power.
In the disguise of renunciation of the post of Prime Minister, Congress president Sonia Gandhi instituted a co-ordination committee and became its chairperson. Though the panel is defunct she remains the National Advisory Council chairperson allowing her to attend every Cabinet meeting and thus in her we have a de facto Prime Minister and a power centre at 10 Janpath.
The extravagant expenditure on the security of politicians must be diverted to modernise our national security forces. Those who want power must be prepared to face self-injected insecurity. The Mumbai massacre is a bugle call to all nationalists and patriots to end the rule of the Congress.
The nation cannot be taken for a ride any more. The Congress must be banished along with all its political buffoons who have segmented and divided the people into ghettos of creed and caste, and sat back to pontificate their hollow words of consolation while innocent people were massacred on the streets. The Congress's hand is smeared with the blood of innocent people.
http://dailypioneer.com/138547/Dial-Congress-for-terror.html
The consequences of the Mumbai attacks
http://sites.google.com/site/hindunow/mumbai-s-9-11--islamist-jehadi-terror
George Friedman (CEO of Stratfor) | December 02, 2008 | 16:53 IST
Last Wednesday evening, a group of Islamist operatives carried out a complex terror operation in Mumbai. The attack was not complex because of the weapons used or its size, but in the apparent training, multiple methods of approaching the city and excellent operational security and discipline in the final phases of the operation, when the last remaining attackers held out in the Taj Mahal hotel for several days. The operational goal of the attack clearly was to cause as many casualties as possible, particularly among Jews and well-to-do guests of five-star hotels. But attacks on various other targets, from railroad stations to hospitals, indicate that the more general purpose was to spread terror in a major Indian city.
While it is not clear precisely who carried out the Mumbai attack, two separate units apparently were involved. One group, possibly consisting of Indian Muslims, was established in Mumbai ahead of the attacks. The second group appears to have just arrived. It traveled via ship from Karachi, Pakistan, later hijacked a small Indian vessel to get past Indian coastal patrols, and ultimately landed near Mumbai.
Extensive preparations apparently had been made, including surveillance of the targets. So while the precise number of attackers remains unclear, the attack clearly was well-planned and well-executed.
Evidence and logic suggest that radical Pakistani Islamists carried out the attack. These groups have a highly complex and deliberately amorphous structure. Rather than being centrally controlled, ad hoc teams are created with links to one or more groups. Conceivably, they might have lacked links to any group, but this is hard to believe. Too much planning and training were involved in this attack for it to have been conceived by a bunch of guys in a garage. While precisely which radical Pakistani Islamist group or groups were involved is unknown, the Mumbai attack appears to have originated in Pakistan. It could have been linked to al Qaeda prime or its various franchises and/or to Kashmiri insurgents.
More important than the question of the exact group that carried out the attack, however, is the attackers' strategic end. There is a tendency to regard terror attacks as ends in themselves, carried out simply for the sake of spreading terror. In the highly politicised atmosphere of Pakistan's radical Islamist factions, however, terror frequently has a more sophisticated and strategic purpose. Whoever invested the time and took the risk in organising this attack had a reason to do so. Let's work backward to that reason by examining the logical outcomes following this attack.
An end to New Delhi's restraint
The most striking aspect of the Mumbai attack is the challenge it presents to the Indian government -- a challenge almost impossible for New Delhi to ignore. A December 2001 Islamist attack on the Indian Parliament triggered an intense confrontation between India and Pakistan. Since then, New Delhi has not responded in a dramatic fashion to numerous Islamist attacks against India that were traceable to Pakistan. The Mumbai attack, by contrast, aimed to force a response from New Delhi by being so grievous that any Indian government showing only a muted reaction to it would fall.
India's restrained response to Islamist attacks (even those originating in Pakistan) in recent years has come about because New Delhi has understood that, for a host of reasons, Islamabad has been unable to control radical Pakistani Islamist groups. India did not want war with Pakistan; it felt it had more important issues to deal with. New Delhi therefore accepted Islamabad's assurances that Pakistan would do its best to curb terror attacks, and after suitable posturing, allowed tensions originating from Islamist attacks to pass.
This time, however, the attackers struck in such a way that New Delhi couldn't allow the incident to pass. As one might expect, public opinion in India is shifting from stunned to furious. India's Congress party-led government is politically weak and nearing the end of its life span. It lacks the political power to ignore the attack, even if it were inclined to do so. If it ignored the attack, it would fall, and a more intensely nationalist government would take its place. It is therefore very difficult to imagine circumstances under which the Indians could respond to this attack in the same manner they have to recent Islamist attacks.
What the Indians actually will do is not clear. In 2001-2002, New Delhi responded to the Parliament attack by moving forces close to the Pakistani border and the Line of Control that separates Indian-and Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, engaging in artillery duels along the front, and bringing its nuclear forces to a high level of alert. The Pakistanis made a similar response. Whether India ever actually intended to attack Pakistan remains unclear, but either way, New Delhi created an intense crisis in Pakistan.
The US and the Indo-Pakistani crisis
The United States used that crisis for its own ends. Having just completed the first phase of its campaign in Afghanistan, Washington was intensely pressuring Pakistan's then-President Pervez Musharraf's government to expand cooperation with the United States; purge its intelligence organisation, the Inter-Services Intelligence, of radical Islamists; and crack down on al Qaeda and the Taliban in the Afghan-Pakistani border region. Musharraf had been reluctant to cooperate with Washington, as doing so inevitably would spark a massive domestic backlash against his government.
The crisis with India produced an opening for the United States. Eager to get India to stand down from the crisis, the Pakistanis looked to the Americans to mediate. And the price for US mediation was increased cooperation from Pakistan with the United States. The Indians, not eager for war, backed down from the crisis after guarantees that Islamabad would impose stronger controls on Islamist groups in Kashmir.
In 2001-2002, the Indo-Pakistani crisis played into American hands. In 2008, the new Indo-Pakistani crisis might play differently. The United States recently has demanded increased Pakistani cooperation along the Afghan border. Meanwhile, President-elect Barack Obama has stated his intention to focus on Afghanistan and pressure the Pakistanis.
Therefore, one of Islamabad's first responses to the new Indo-Pakistani crisis was to announce that if the Indians increased their forces along Pakistan's eastern border, Pakistan would be forced to withdraw 100,000 troops from its western border with Afghanistan.
In other words, threats from India would cause Pakistan to dramatically reduce its cooperation with the United States in the Afghan war. The Indian foreign minister is flying to the United States to meet with Obama; obviously, this matter will be discussed among others.
We expect the United States to pressure India not to create a crisis, in order to avoid this outcome. As we have said, the problem is that it is unclear whether politically the Indians can afford restraint. At the very least, New Delhi must demand that the Pakistani government take steps to make the ISI and Pakistan's other internal security apparatus more effective. Even if the Indians concede that there was no ISI involvement in the attack, they will argue that the ISI is incapable of stopping such attacks. They will demand a purge and reform of the ISI as a sign of Pakistani commitment. Barring that, New Delhi will move troops to the Indo-Pakistani frontier to intimidate Pakistan and placate Indian public opinion.
Dilemmas for Islamabad, New Delhi and Washington
At that point, Islamabad will have a serious problem. The Pakistani government is even weaker than the Indian government. Pakistan's civilian regime does not control the Pakistani military, and therefore does not control the ISI. The civilians can't decide to transform Pakistani security, and the military is not inclined to make this transformation. (Pakistan's military has had ample opportunity to do so if it wished.) Pakistan faces the challenge, just one among many, that its civilian and even military leadership lack the ability to reach deep into the ISI and security services to transform them. In some ways, these agencies operate under their own rules.
Add to this the reality that the ISI and security forces -- even if they are acting more assertively, as Islamabad claims -- are demonstrably incapable of controlling radical Islamists in Pakistan. If they were capable, the attack on Mumbai would have been thwarted in Pakistan. The simple reality is that in Pakistan's case, the will to make this transformation does not seem to be present, and even if it were, the ability to suppress terror attacks isn't there.
The United States might well want to limit New Delhi's response. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is on her way to India to discuss just this. But the politics of India's situation make it unlikely that the Indians can do anything more than listen. It is more than simply a political issue for New Delhi; the Indians have no reason to believe that the Mumbai operation was one of a kind. Further operations like the Mumbai attack might well be planned. Unless the Pakistanis shift their posture inside Pakistan, India has no way of knowing whether other such attacks can be stymied. The Indians will be sympathetic to Washington's plight in Afghanistan and the need to keep Pakistani troops at the Afghan border. But New Delhi will need something that the Americans -- and in fact the Pakistanis -- can't deliver: a guarantee that there will be no more attacks like this one.
The Indian government cannot chance inaction. It probably would fall if it did. Moreover, in the event of inactivity and another attack, Indian public opinion probably will swing to an uncontrollable extreme. If an attack takes place but India has moved toward crisis posture with Pakistan, at least no one can argue that the Indian government remained passive in the face of threats to national security. Therefore, India is likely to refuse American requests for restraint.
It is possible that New Delhi will make a radical proposal to Rice, however. Given that the Pakistani government is incapable of exercising control in its own country, and given that Pakistan now represents a threat to both US and Indian national security, the Indians might suggest a joint operation with the Americans against Pakistan.
What that joint operation might entail is uncertain, but regardless, this is something that Rice would reject out of hand and that Obama would reject in January 2009. Pakistan has a huge population and nuclear weapons, and the last thing Bush or Obama wants is to practice nation-building in Pakistan. The Indians, of course, will anticipate this response. The truth is that New Delhi itself does not want to engage deep in Pakistan to strike at militant training camps and other Islamist sites. That would be a nightmare. But if Rice shows up with a request for Indian restraint and no concrete proposal -- or willingness to entertain a proposal -- for solving the Pakistani problem, India will be able to refuse on the grounds that the Americans are asking India to absorb a risk (more Mumbai-style attacks) without the United States' willingness to share in the risk.
Setting the stage for a new Indo-Pakistani confrontation
That will set the stage for another Indo-Pakistani confrontation. India will push forces forward all along the Indo-Pakistani frontier, move its nuclear forces to an alert level, begin shelling Pakistan, and perhaps -- given the seriousness of the situation -- attack short distances into Pakistan and even carry out air strikes deep in Pakistan. India will demand greater transparency for New Delhi in Pakistani intelligence operations. The Indians will not want to occupy Pakistan; they will want to occupy Pakistan's security apparatus.
Naturally, the Pakistanis will refuse that. There is no way they can give India, their main adversary, insight into Pakistani intelligence operations. But without that access, India has no reason to trust Pakistan. This will leave the Indians in an odd position: They will be in a near-war posture, but will have made no demands of Pakistan that Islamabad can reasonably deliver and that would benefit India. In one sense, India will be gesturing. In another sense, India will be trapped by making a gesture on which Pakistan cannot deliver. The situation thus could get out of hand.
In the meantime, the Pakistanis certainly will withdraw forces from western Pakistan and deploy them in eastern Pakistan. That will mean that one leg of the (US commander David) Petraeus and Obama plans would collapse.
Washington's expectation of greater Pakistani cooperation along the Afghan border will disappear along with the troops. This will free the Taliban from whatever limits the Pakistani army had placed on it. The Taliban's ability to fight would increase, while the motivation for any of the Taliban to enter talks -- as Afghan President Hamid Karzai has suggested -- would decline. US forces, already stretched to the limit, would face an increasingly difficult situation, while pressure on al Qaeda in the tribal areas would decrease.
Now, step back and consider the situation the Mumbai attackers have created. First, the Indian government faces an internal political crisis driving it toward a confrontation it didn't plan on. Second, the minimum Pakistani response to a renewed Indo-Pakistani crisis will be withdrawing forces from western Pakistan, thereby strengthening the Taliban and securing al Qaeda. Third, sufficient pressure on Pakistan's civilian government could cause it to collapse, opening the door to a military-Islamist government -- or it could see Pakistan collapse into chaos, giving Islamists security in various regions and an opportunity to reshape Pakistan. Finally, the United States' situation in Afghanistan has now become enormously more complex.
By staging an attack the Indian government can't ignore, the Mumbai attackers have set in motion an existential crisis for Pakistan. The reality of Pakistan cannot be transformed, trapped as the country is between the United States and India. Almost every evolution from this point forward benefits Islamists. Strategically, the attack on Mumbai was a precise blow struck to achieve uncertain but favorable political outcomes for the Islamists.
Rice's trip to India now becomes the crucial next step. She wants Indian restraint. She does not want the western Pakistani border to collapse. But she cannot guarantee what India must have: assurance of no further terror attacks on India originating in Pakistan. Without that, India must do something. No Indian government could survive without some kind of action. So it is up to Rice, in one of her last acts as secretary of state, to come up with a miraculous solution to head off a final, catastrophic crisis for the Bush administration -- and a defining first crisis for the new Obama administration. Former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld once said that the enemy gets a vote. The Islamists cast their ballot in Mumbai.
Courtesy www.stratfor.com
http://www.rediff.com///news/2008/dec/02column-the-consequences-of-the-mumbai-attacks.htm
George Friedman (CEO of Stratfor) | December 02, 2008 | 16:53 IST
Last Wednesday evening, a group of Islamist operatives carried out a complex terror operation in Mumbai. The attack was not complex because of the weapons used or its size, but in the apparent training, multiple methods of approaching the city and excellent operational security and discipline in the final phases of the operation, when the last remaining attackers held out in the Taj Mahal hotel for several days. The operational goal of the attack clearly was to cause as many casualties as possible, particularly among Jews and well-to-do guests of five-star hotels. But attacks on various other targets, from railroad stations to hospitals, indicate that the more general purpose was to spread terror in a major Indian city.
While it is not clear precisely who carried out the Mumbai attack, two separate units apparently were involved. One group, possibly consisting of Indian Muslims, was established in Mumbai ahead of the attacks. The second group appears to have just arrived. It traveled via ship from Karachi, Pakistan, later hijacked a small Indian vessel to get past Indian coastal patrols, and ultimately landed near Mumbai.
Extensive preparations apparently had been made, including surveillance of the targets. So while the precise number of attackers remains unclear, the attack clearly was well-planned and well-executed.
Evidence and logic suggest that radical Pakistani Islamists carried out the attack. These groups have a highly complex and deliberately amorphous structure. Rather than being centrally controlled, ad hoc teams are created with links to one or more groups. Conceivably, they might have lacked links to any group, but this is hard to believe. Too much planning and training were involved in this attack for it to have been conceived by a bunch of guys in a garage. While precisely which radical Pakistani Islamist group or groups were involved is unknown, the Mumbai attack appears to have originated in Pakistan. It could have been linked to al Qaeda prime or its various franchises and/or to Kashmiri insurgents.
More important than the question of the exact group that carried out the attack, however, is the attackers' strategic end. There is a tendency to regard terror attacks as ends in themselves, carried out simply for the sake of spreading terror. In the highly politicised atmosphere of Pakistan's radical Islamist factions, however, terror frequently has a more sophisticated and strategic purpose. Whoever invested the time and took the risk in organising this attack had a reason to do so. Let's work backward to that reason by examining the logical outcomes following this attack.
An end to New Delhi's restraint
The most striking aspect of the Mumbai attack is the challenge it presents to the Indian government -- a challenge almost impossible for New Delhi to ignore. A December 2001 Islamist attack on the Indian Parliament triggered an intense confrontation between India and Pakistan. Since then, New Delhi has not responded in a dramatic fashion to numerous Islamist attacks against India that were traceable to Pakistan. The Mumbai attack, by contrast, aimed to force a response from New Delhi by being so grievous that any Indian government showing only a muted reaction to it would fall.
India's restrained response to Islamist attacks (even those originating in Pakistan) in recent years has come about because New Delhi has understood that, for a host of reasons, Islamabad has been unable to control radical Pakistani Islamist groups. India did not want war with Pakistan; it felt it had more important issues to deal with. New Delhi therefore accepted Islamabad's assurances that Pakistan would do its best to curb terror attacks, and after suitable posturing, allowed tensions originating from Islamist attacks to pass.
This time, however, the attackers struck in such a way that New Delhi couldn't allow the incident to pass. As one might expect, public opinion in India is shifting from stunned to furious. India's Congress party-led government is politically weak and nearing the end of its life span. It lacks the political power to ignore the attack, even if it were inclined to do so. If it ignored the attack, it would fall, and a more intensely nationalist government would take its place. It is therefore very difficult to imagine circumstances under which the Indians could respond to this attack in the same manner they have to recent Islamist attacks.
What the Indians actually will do is not clear. In 2001-2002, New Delhi responded to the Parliament attack by moving forces close to the Pakistani border and the Line of Control that separates Indian-and Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, engaging in artillery duels along the front, and bringing its nuclear forces to a high level of alert. The Pakistanis made a similar response. Whether India ever actually intended to attack Pakistan remains unclear, but either way, New Delhi created an intense crisis in Pakistan.
The US and the Indo-Pakistani crisis
The United States used that crisis for its own ends. Having just completed the first phase of its campaign in Afghanistan, Washington was intensely pressuring Pakistan's then-President Pervez Musharraf's government to expand cooperation with the United States; purge its intelligence organisation, the Inter-Services Intelligence, of radical Islamists; and crack down on al Qaeda and the Taliban in the Afghan-Pakistani border region. Musharraf had been reluctant to cooperate with Washington, as doing so inevitably would spark a massive domestic backlash against his government.
The crisis with India produced an opening for the United States. Eager to get India to stand down from the crisis, the Pakistanis looked to the Americans to mediate. And the price for US mediation was increased cooperation from Pakistan with the United States. The Indians, not eager for war, backed down from the crisis after guarantees that Islamabad would impose stronger controls on Islamist groups in Kashmir.
In 2001-2002, the Indo-Pakistani crisis played into American hands. In 2008, the new Indo-Pakistani crisis might play differently. The United States recently has demanded increased Pakistani cooperation along the Afghan border. Meanwhile, President-elect Barack Obama has stated his intention to focus on Afghanistan and pressure the Pakistanis.
Therefore, one of Islamabad's first responses to the new Indo-Pakistani crisis was to announce that if the Indians increased their forces along Pakistan's eastern border, Pakistan would be forced to withdraw 100,000 troops from its western border with Afghanistan.
In other words, threats from India would cause Pakistan to dramatically reduce its cooperation with the United States in the Afghan war. The Indian foreign minister is flying to the United States to meet with Obama; obviously, this matter will be discussed among others.
We expect the United States to pressure India not to create a crisis, in order to avoid this outcome. As we have said, the problem is that it is unclear whether politically the Indians can afford restraint. At the very least, New Delhi must demand that the Pakistani government take steps to make the ISI and Pakistan's other internal security apparatus more effective. Even if the Indians concede that there was no ISI involvement in the attack, they will argue that the ISI is incapable of stopping such attacks. They will demand a purge and reform of the ISI as a sign of Pakistani commitment. Barring that, New Delhi will move troops to the Indo-Pakistani frontier to intimidate Pakistan and placate Indian public opinion.
Dilemmas for Islamabad, New Delhi and Washington
At that point, Islamabad will have a serious problem. The Pakistani government is even weaker than the Indian government. Pakistan's civilian regime does not control the Pakistani military, and therefore does not control the ISI. The civilians can't decide to transform Pakistani security, and the military is not inclined to make this transformation. (Pakistan's military has had ample opportunity to do so if it wished.) Pakistan faces the challenge, just one among many, that its civilian and even military leadership lack the ability to reach deep into the ISI and security services to transform them. In some ways, these agencies operate under their own rules.
Add to this the reality that the ISI and security forces -- even if they are acting more assertively, as Islamabad claims -- are demonstrably incapable of controlling radical Islamists in Pakistan. If they were capable, the attack on Mumbai would have been thwarted in Pakistan. The simple reality is that in Pakistan's case, the will to make this transformation does not seem to be present, and even if it were, the ability to suppress terror attacks isn't there.
The United States might well want to limit New Delhi's response. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is on her way to India to discuss just this. But the politics of India's situation make it unlikely that the Indians can do anything more than listen. It is more than simply a political issue for New Delhi; the Indians have no reason to believe that the Mumbai operation was one of a kind. Further operations like the Mumbai attack might well be planned. Unless the Pakistanis shift their posture inside Pakistan, India has no way of knowing whether other such attacks can be stymied. The Indians will be sympathetic to Washington's plight in Afghanistan and the need to keep Pakistani troops at the Afghan border. But New Delhi will need something that the Americans -- and in fact the Pakistanis -- can't deliver: a guarantee that there will be no more attacks like this one.
The Indian government cannot chance inaction. It probably would fall if it did. Moreover, in the event of inactivity and another attack, Indian public opinion probably will swing to an uncontrollable extreme. If an attack takes place but India has moved toward crisis posture with Pakistan, at least no one can argue that the Indian government remained passive in the face of threats to national security. Therefore, India is likely to refuse American requests for restraint.
It is possible that New Delhi will make a radical proposal to Rice, however. Given that the Pakistani government is incapable of exercising control in its own country, and given that Pakistan now represents a threat to both US and Indian national security, the Indians might suggest a joint operation with the Americans against Pakistan.
What that joint operation might entail is uncertain, but regardless, this is something that Rice would reject out of hand and that Obama would reject in January 2009. Pakistan has a huge population and nuclear weapons, and the last thing Bush or Obama wants is to practice nation-building in Pakistan. The Indians, of course, will anticipate this response. The truth is that New Delhi itself does not want to engage deep in Pakistan to strike at militant training camps and other Islamist sites. That would be a nightmare. But if Rice shows up with a request for Indian restraint and no concrete proposal -- or willingness to entertain a proposal -- for solving the Pakistani problem, India will be able to refuse on the grounds that the Americans are asking India to absorb a risk (more Mumbai-style attacks) without the United States' willingness to share in the risk.
Setting the stage for a new Indo-Pakistani confrontation
That will set the stage for another Indo-Pakistani confrontation. India will push forces forward all along the Indo-Pakistani frontier, move its nuclear forces to an alert level, begin shelling Pakistan, and perhaps -- given the seriousness of the situation -- attack short distances into Pakistan and even carry out air strikes deep in Pakistan. India will demand greater transparency for New Delhi in Pakistani intelligence operations. The Indians will not want to occupy Pakistan; they will want to occupy Pakistan's security apparatus.
Naturally, the Pakistanis will refuse that. There is no way they can give India, their main adversary, insight into Pakistani intelligence operations. But without that access, India has no reason to trust Pakistan. This will leave the Indians in an odd position: They will be in a near-war posture, but will have made no demands of Pakistan that Islamabad can reasonably deliver and that would benefit India. In one sense, India will be gesturing. In another sense, India will be trapped by making a gesture on which Pakistan cannot deliver. The situation thus could get out of hand.
In the meantime, the Pakistanis certainly will withdraw forces from western Pakistan and deploy them in eastern Pakistan. That will mean that one leg of the (US commander David) Petraeus and Obama plans would collapse.
Washington's expectation of greater Pakistani cooperation along the Afghan border will disappear along with the troops. This will free the Taliban from whatever limits the Pakistani army had placed on it. The Taliban's ability to fight would increase, while the motivation for any of the Taliban to enter talks -- as Afghan President Hamid Karzai has suggested -- would decline. US forces, already stretched to the limit, would face an increasingly difficult situation, while pressure on al Qaeda in the tribal areas would decrease.
Now, step back and consider the situation the Mumbai attackers have created. First, the Indian government faces an internal political crisis driving it toward a confrontation it didn't plan on. Second, the minimum Pakistani response to a renewed Indo-Pakistani crisis will be withdrawing forces from western Pakistan, thereby strengthening the Taliban and securing al Qaeda. Third, sufficient pressure on Pakistan's civilian government could cause it to collapse, opening the door to a military-Islamist government -- or it could see Pakistan collapse into chaos, giving Islamists security in various regions and an opportunity to reshape Pakistan. Finally, the United States' situation in Afghanistan has now become enormously more complex.
By staging an attack the Indian government can't ignore, the Mumbai attackers have set in motion an existential crisis for Pakistan. The reality of Pakistan cannot be transformed, trapped as the country is between the United States and India. Almost every evolution from this point forward benefits Islamists. Strategically, the attack on Mumbai was a precise blow struck to achieve uncertain but favorable political outcomes for the Islamists.
Rice's trip to India now becomes the crucial next step. She wants Indian restraint. She does not want the western Pakistani border to collapse. But she cannot guarantee what India must have: assurance of no further terror attacks on India originating in Pakistan. Without that, India must do something. No Indian government could survive without some kind of action. So it is up to Rice, in one of her last acts as secretary of state, to come up with a miraculous solution to head off a final, catastrophic crisis for the Bush administration -- and a defining first crisis for the new Obama administration. Former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld once said that the enemy gets a vote. The Islamists cast their ballot in Mumbai.
Courtesy www.stratfor.com
http://www.rediff.com///news/2008/dec/02column-the-consequences-of-the-mumbai-attacks.htm
DENIAL AND DIVERSION DEMORALIZE SECURITY FORCES
A press conference was held at 11:30 AM at the Bangalore Press Club under the auspices of FINS— Forum for Integrated National Security. The participants included Lt Gen V.M. Patil, Dr. N.R. Rajaram, V. Patil, IPS and several other concerned figures. What is given is Dr. Rajaram's statement. The official release was slightly different in text but in general agreement. It was carried by all the major media.
N.S. Rajaram
Dr. N.S. Rajaram: 2 December 2008
DENIAL AND DIVERSION DEMORALIZE SECURITY FORCES
We are members of a non-partisan group not affiliated with any political party but committed to India’s security. We are dismayed by the deteriorating security environment in the country and what appears to us to be a systematic campaign against the security forces—the army and the police—through media leaks. We feel that this is grossly unfair to men and women of the security forces, many whom have laid down their lives going beyond the call of duty, during the attack on the Parliament and most recently in the horrific terror attacks on Mumbai. Surely our security forces deserve better than this.
As we see it there is a pattern of denial of real the threat of jihadi terrorism followed by political misuse of the security apparatus by creating diversions that makes them pursue irrelevant or even non-existent threats. This has left the field open to Jihadi outfits like the dreaded Lahkar e Toiba to carry out their nefarious design.
This is what seems to have happened as terrorists struck Mumbai. The elite ATS (Anti-Terror Squad) was largely preoccupied with obtaining evidence against Sadhvi Pragya Thakur and Col Purohit under enormous pressure from the politicians. The ATS has admitted that 90 percent of its resources were consumed by these fruitless investigations. No evidence has been found against these two while the ATS was diverted from its real task of protecting Mumbai against terror attacks.
This was gross misuse of security apparatus in pursuit of negligible to non-existent threats while the real threat was at the doorstep, about to strike. Col Purohit is an officer with a distinguished record of successfully fighting terrorists in encounters, while ATS Chief Hemant Karkare lost his life in the recent terrorist attack.
This is bound to seriously demoralize the security forces. They may ask themselves why they should lay down their lives to protect leaders who are more concerned about protecting their political interests than national security, even at the cost of the lives of brave men and women who protect them.
We appeal to the national leadership to come out of this state of denial—of ignoring the real threat of Jihadi terrorism—while holding up non-existent threats like ‘Hindu terror’ in pursuit of political goals. We feel that this attempt to put religious labels on terrorist acts is highly divisive and risks polarizing the country along communal lines. What is needed in this crisis is unity, not division.
N.S. Rajaram
Dr. N.S. Rajaram: 2 December 2008
DENIAL AND DIVERSION DEMORALIZE SECURITY FORCES
We are members of a non-partisan group not affiliated with any political party but committed to India’s security. We are dismayed by the deteriorating security environment in the country and what appears to us to be a systematic campaign against the security forces—the army and the police—through media leaks. We feel that this is grossly unfair to men and women of the security forces, many whom have laid down their lives going beyond the call of duty, during the attack on the Parliament and most recently in the horrific terror attacks on Mumbai. Surely our security forces deserve better than this.
As we see it there is a pattern of denial of real the threat of jihadi terrorism followed by political misuse of the security apparatus by creating diversions that makes them pursue irrelevant or even non-existent threats. This has left the field open to Jihadi outfits like the dreaded Lahkar e Toiba to carry out their nefarious design.
This is what seems to have happened as terrorists struck Mumbai. The elite ATS (Anti-Terror Squad) was largely preoccupied with obtaining evidence against Sadhvi Pragya Thakur and Col Purohit under enormous pressure from the politicians. The ATS has admitted that 90 percent of its resources were consumed by these fruitless investigations. No evidence has been found against these two while the ATS was diverted from its real task of protecting Mumbai against terror attacks.
This was gross misuse of security apparatus in pursuit of negligible to non-existent threats while the real threat was at the doorstep, about to strike. Col Purohit is an officer with a distinguished record of successfully fighting terrorists in encounters, while ATS Chief Hemant Karkare lost his life in the recent terrorist attack.
This is bound to seriously demoralize the security forces. They may ask themselves why they should lay down their lives to protect leaders who are more concerned about protecting their political interests than national security, even at the cost of the lives of brave men and women who protect them.
We appeal to the national leadership to come out of this state of denial—of ignoring the real threat of Jihadi terrorism—while holding up non-existent threats like ‘Hindu terror’ in pursuit of political goals. We feel that this attempt to put religious labels on terrorist acts is highly divisive and risks polarizing the country along communal lines. What is needed in this crisis is unity, not division.
Sonia’s presence in Delhi is costing India dearly
François Gautier
First Published : 02 Dec 2008 02:37:00 AM ISTLast Updated : 02 Dec 2008 10:20:05 AM IST
In 1898, the French writer Emile Zola wrote an open letter to the then French president in the newspaper L’Aurore, titled j’accuse (‘I accuse’), where he accused the French government of anti- Semitism towards Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish officer unfairly condemned for treason.
Now it is time for the people of India to say openly that which many, including within the Congress, think secretly and may utter in the privacy of their chambers.
It is not about Manmohan Singh, it is not even about Shivraj Patil, the fall guy; it is about that one person, the Eminence Grise of India. She who pulls all the strings, She whose shadow looms menacingly over so many, She who holds no portfolio, is just a simple elected MP, like 540 others, but rules like an empress.
Sometimes, one’s very physical presence at the top is enough to move things, to influence the course of events. One word from Her, a glance, a frown, are enough to put the whole heavy, inert, unwilling machinery of India’s bureaucracy and political system in full motion. Sometimes She need not say anything: in the true tradition of Bhakti, Her ministers, Her secretaries, interpret Her silences and rush to cater to Her western and Christian identity.
Nevertheless, she has said and acted enough so that one day she may stand accused on the pages of History for what she must have done to India.
I’accuse Sonia Gandhi as being responsible for the tragedy of Mumbai, having emasculated India’s intelligence agencies by stopping them from investigating terror attacks in the last four years, including the Mumbai train blasts. She has also neutralised the ATS by ordering them at all costs to ferret out ‘Hindu terrorism’, which if it exists, has wrought minuscule damage compared to what Islamic terror has done since 2004. Did the US send a warning to India that there may be an attack on Mumbai and that the Taj would be one of the targets? Were these ignored because the ATS was too busy chasing Hindu ‘terrorists’ on Sonia’s orders? I accuse Sonia and her government of having made the NSG the laughing stock of the world. How many times did the NSG (who took ten hours to reach Mumbai) claim that it had “sanitised the Taj and that the operation was over” and how many times did a bomb go off immediately after? For the last 20 years, the NSG has guarded VIPs and has become soft. See the comments of Israeli terror specialists, who said the NSG should have first sanitised the immediate surroundings of the places of conflict, kept the bystanders and press (who gave terrorists watching TV in the Taj rooms a perfect report of the security forces’ whereabouts) out of the place, gathered enough information about the position of the terrorists and hostages before taking action, instead of immediately engaging the terrorists, and ensuring the deaths of so many hostages.
I accuse Sonia of having let her Christian and Western background, in four years, divide India on religious and caste lines in a cynical and methodical manner.
I accuse Sonia of weakening India’s spirit of sacrifice and courage, so that 20 terrorists (or less) held at ransom the financial capital of India for more than three days.
I accuse Sonia Gandhi of always pointing the finger at Pakistan, when terrorism in India is now mostly homegrown, even if it takes help, training, refuge and arms from Pakistan; of not warning Indians of the grave dangers of Islamic terror for cynical election purposes.
I accuse Sonia of being an enemy of the Hindus, who always gave refuge to persecuted minorities, and who are the only people in the world to accept that God may manifest under different names, in different epochs, using different scriptures.
I accuse Sonia Gandhi of taking advantage of India’s respect for women, its undue fascination with the Gandhi name, and its stupid mania for White Skin.
I’accuse Sonia of exploiting the Indian Press’ obsession with her. She hardly ever gave interview in 20 years, except scripted ones to NDTV, yet the Press always protects her, never blames her and keeps silent over her covert role.
I’accuse Sonia and her government of trying to make heroes of subservient and inefficient men to hide the humiliation of Mumbai 26/11. Before going to his death, Hemant Karkare, the ATS chief, was shown on television clumsily handling his helmet, as someone who uses it very rarely. Why did he die of bullet wounds in the chest when he was wearing a bullet-proof vest? Either Indian vests are inferior quality or he was not wearing one.
How did the terrorists who killed him and his fellow officer escape in the same vehicle used by the ATS chief ? Why did he and his officers go into Cama Hospital without ascertaining where the terrorists were? We honour his death, but these facts say a lot about the ATS’ battle-readiness.
Will someone in the Congress, someone who feels more Indian than faithful to Sonia, stand up and speak the truth? Who said, “Go after Hindu terrorists”? Who insisted on putting pressure on BJP governments in Karnataka or Orissa for so-called persecution of Christians, when Christians have always practised their faith in total freedom here, while their missionaries are converting hundreds of thousands of innocent tribals and Dalits with the billions of dollars given by gullible westerners? Who said, “Go soft on Islamic terrorism”? Who wants to do away with India’s nuclear deterrence in the face of Pakistani and Chinese nuclear threats, by pushing at all costs the one sided Indo-US nuclear deal, which makes no secret of its intention to denuclearise India militarily? I am sure Sonia Gandhi has good qualities: she probably was a good wife to Rajiv, a good daughter in law to Indira and by all accounts, she is a good mother to her children. One also hears first-hand reports about her concern for smaller people, her dignity in the suffering that befell her when her husband was blown to pieces, and her courtesy with visitors.
Nevertheless, she is a danger to India.
Her very presence, both physical and occult, open the doors to forces inimical to India. Even Indian Christians should understand that she is not a gift to them: her presence at the top has emboldened fanatics like John Dayal or Valson Thampu, who practise an orthodox Christianity prevalent in the West in the early 20th century, but no longer, to radicalise their flock. Indian Christians should recognise that they have a much better deal here than Christians or Hindus have in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia or Saudi Arabia.
Under Sonia’s rule, Indian Muslims, too, have been used as electoral pawns. They have been encouraged to shun the Sufi streak, a blend of the best of Islam and Vedanta, for a hard-line Sunni brand imported from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Afghanistan.
For the good of India, her civilisation, her immense spirituality and culture, Sonia Gandhi has to go and a government that thinks Indian, breathes nationalism and will protect its citizens must be voted to power.
— fgautier@auroville.org.in
Partying Rahul raises hackles
Staff Reporter | New Delhi
Even as the nation felt searing pain and anger over the death of more than 195 people— including foreigners — in the terrorist attack on Mumbai, Congress scion Rahul Gandhi merrily partied. According to a report carried on Monday by a tabloid, Mail Today, Congress general secretary and heir apparent Rahul Gandhi went partying on Saturday with his pals at a farmhouse on Delhi’s outskirts.
The ‘Prince’ partied hard, till 5 in the morning, at the ‘sangeet’ ceremony for the wedding of Samir Sharma, one of his childhood friends. The gathering was at a sprawling farmhouse at Radhey Mohan Chowk, the haven of people who lead charmed lives, beyond Chhhatarpur. A close aide of Rahul confirmed his presence at the function.
“Rahulji was in Rajasthan on Saturday. He attended four rallies there and returned to Delhi at 10 pm. Later, he went to this party that was pre-scheduled,” said a staff member on the condition of anonymity. He said that Rahul was at the farmhouse with Samir Sharma, the US-based furniture designer son of Captain Satish Sharma, the late Rajiv Gandhi’s flying partner. Capt Sharma had nursed the Gandhi family’s pocketborough, Rae Bareli, till Sonia Gandhi chose to contest from there in 2004.
“Why raise such a hue and cry over a small and pre-scheduled party?” he asked. Gandhi’s media coordinator Pankaj Shankar, on the other hand, refused comment on the issue. “I am not a spokesperson, I just coordinate among mediapersons and Rahul Gandhi. Congress spokesperson Jayanti Natarajan has clarified the issue,” said Shankar.
On Sunday, Rahul’s sister Priyanka Vadra had caused a flutter by saying that late Indira Gandhi would have “made us very proud” by the way she would have reacted to the Mumbai terror strike.
As per the report published by the tabloid, Saturday night’s ‘sangeet’ was a lavish affair. Leena Musafir, the sister of the woman with whom Samir is getting married, and her husband Inder, hosted it. Over 800 guests, including regulars at Page 3 dos, attended the party. Later, however, Rahul was quoted in another tabloid, Metro Now, saying, “It seems as if someone entered my house and slapped me.”
The tabloid stated that Rahul made this comment while addressing a meeting of the Congress Working Committee (CWC), which had reportedly been called to discuss the impact of the attack on the party and the country.
First Published : 02 Dec 2008 02:37:00 AM ISTLast Updated : 02 Dec 2008 10:20:05 AM IST
In 1898, the French writer Emile Zola wrote an open letter to the then French president in the newspaper L’Aurore, titled j’accuse (‘I accuse’), where he accused the French government of anti- Semitism towards Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish officer unfairly condemned for treason.
Now it is time for the people of India to say openly that which many, including within the Congress, think secretly and may utter in the privacy of their chambers.
It is not about Manmohan Singh, it is not even about Shivraj Patil, the fall guy; it is about that one person, the Eminence Grise of India. She who pulls all the strings, She whose shadow looms menacingly over so many, She who holds no portfolio, is just a simple elected MP, like 540 others, but rules like an empress.
Sometimes, one’s very physical presence at the top is enough to move things, to influence the course of events. One word from Her, a glance, a frown, are enough to put the whole heavy, inert, unwilling machinery of India’s bureaucracy and political system in full motion. Sometimes She need not say anything: in the true tradition of Bhakti, Her ministers, Her secretaries, interpret Her silences and rush to cater to Her western and Christian identity.
Nevertheless, she has said and acted enough so that one day she may stand accused on the pages of History for what she must have done to India.
I’accuse Sonia Gandhi as being responsible for the tragedy of Mumbai, having emasculated India’s intelligence agencies by stopping them from investigating terror attacks in the last four years, including the Mumbai train blasts. She has also neutralised the ATS by ordering them at all costs to ferret out ‘Hindu terrorism’, which if it exists, has wrought minuscule damage compared to what Islamic terror has done since 2004. Did the US send a warning to India that there may be an attack on Mumbai and that the Taj would be one of the targets? Were these ignored because the ATS was too busy chasing Hindu ‘terrorists’ on Sonia’s orders? I accuse Sonia and her government of having made the NSG the laughing stock of the world. How many times did the NSG (who took ten hours to reach Mumbai) claim that it had “sanitised the Taj and that the operation was over” and how many times did a bomb go off immediately after? For the last 20 years, the NSG has guarded VIPs and has become soft. See the comments of Israeli terror specialists, who said the NSG should have first sanitised the immediate surroundings of the places of conflict, kept the bystanders and press (who gave terrorists watching TV in the Taj rooms a perfect report of the security forces’ whereabouts) out of the place, gathered enough information about the position of the terrorists and hostages before taking action, instead of immediately engaging the terrorists, and ensuring the deaths of so many hostages.
I accuse Sonia of having let her Christian and Western background, in four years, divide India on religious and caste lines in a cynical and methodical manner.
I accuse Sonia of weakening India’s spirit of sacrifice and courage, so that 20 terrorists (or less) held at ransom the financial capital of India for more than three days.
I accuse Sonia Gandhi of always pointing the finger at Pakistan, when terrorism in India is now mostly homegrown, even if it takes help, training, refuge and arms from Pakistan; of not warning Indians of the grave dangers of Islamic terror for cynical election purposes.
I accuse Sonia of being an enemy of the Hindus, who always gave refuge to persecuted minorities, and who are the only people in the world to accept that God may manifest under different names, in different epochs, using different scriptures.
I accuse Sonia Gandhi of taking advantage of India’s respect for women, its undue fascination with the Gandhi name, and its stupid mania for White Skin.
I’accuse Sonia of exploiting the Indian Press’ obsession with her. She hardly ever gave interview in 20 years, except scripted ones to NDTV, yet the Press always protects her, never blames her and keeps silent over her covert role.
I’accuse Sonia and her government of trying to make heroes of subservient and inefficient men to hide the humiliation of Mumbai 26/11. Before going to his death, Hemant Karkare, the ATS chief, was shown on television clumsily handling his helmet, as someone who uses it very rarely. Why did he die of bullet wounds in the chest when he was wearing a bullet-proof vest? Either Indian vests are inferior quality or he was not wearing one.
How did the terrorists who killed him and his fellow officer escape in the same vehicle used by the ATS chief ? Why did he and his officers go into Cama Hospital without ascertaining where the terrorists were? We honour his death, but these facts say a lot about the ATS’ battle-readiness.
Will someone in the Congress, someone who feels more Indian than faithful to Sonia, stand up and speak the truth? Who said, “Go after Hindu terrorists”? Who insisted on putting pressure on BJP governments in Karnataka or Orissa for so-called persecution of Christians, when Christians have always practised their faith in total freedom here, while their missionaries are converting hundreds of thousands of innocent tribals and Dalits with the billions of dollars given by gullible westerners? Who said, “Go soft on Islamic terrorism”? Who wants to do away with India’s nuclear deterrence in the face of Pakistani and Chinese nuclear threats, by pushing at all costs the one sided Indo-US nuclear deal, which makes no secret of its intention to denuclearise India militarily? I am sure Sonia Gandhi has good qualities: she probably was a good wife to Rajiv, a good daughter in law to Indira and by all accounts, she is a good mother to her children. One also hears first-hand reports about her concern for smaller people, her dignity in the suffering that befell her when her husband was blown to pieces, and her courtesy with visitors.
Nevertheless, she is a danger to India.
Her very presence, both physical and occult, open the doors to forces inimical to India. Even Indian Christians should understand that she is not a gift to them: her presence at the top has emboldened fanatics like John Dayal or Valson Thampu, who practise an orthodox Christianity prevalent in the West in the early 20th century, but no longer, to radicalise their flock. Indian Christians should recognise that they have a much better deal here than Christians or Hindus have in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia or Saudi Arabia.
Under Sonia’s rule, Indian Muslims, too, have been used as electoral pawns. They have been encouraged to shun the Sufi streak, a blend of the best of Islam and Vedanta, for a hard-line Sunni brand imported from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Afghanistan.
For the good of India, her civilisation, her immense spirituality and culture, Sonia Gandhi has to go and a government that thinks Indian, breathes nationalism and will protect its citizens must be voted to power.
— fgautier@auroville.org.in
Partying Rahul raises hackles
Staff Reporter | New Delhi
Even as the nation felt searing pain and anger over the death of more than 195 people— including foreigners — in the terrorist attack on Mumbai, Congress scion Rahul Gandhi merrily partied. According to a report carried on Monday by a tabloid, Mail Today, Congress general secretary and heir apparent Rahul Gandhi went partying on Saturday with his pals at a farmhouse on Delhi’s outskirts.
The ‘Prince’ partied hard, till 5 in the morning, at the ‘sangeet’ ceremony for the wedding of Samir Sharma, one of his childhood friends. The gathering was at a sprawling farmhouse at Radhey Mohan Chowk, the haven of people who lead charmed lives, beyond Chhhatarpur. A close aide of Rahul confirmed his presence at the function.
“Rahulji was in Rajasthan on Saturday. He attended four rallies there and returned to Delhi at 10 pm. Later, he went to this party that was pre-scheduled,” said a staff member on the condition of anonymity. He said that Rahul was at the farmhouse with Samir Sharma, the US-based furniture designer son of Captain Satish Sharma, the late Rajiv Gandhi’s flying partner. Capt Sharma had nursed the Gandhi family’s pocketborough, Rae Bareli, till Sonia Gandhi chose to contest from there in 2004.
“Why raise such a hue and cry over a small and pre-scheduled party?” he asked. Gandhi’s media coordinator Pankaj Shankar, on the other hand, refused comment on the issue. “I am not a spokesperson, I just coordinate among mediapersons and Rahul Gandhi. Congress spokesperson Jayanti Natarajan has clarified the issue,” said Shankar.
On Sunday, Rahul’s sister Priyanka Vadra had caused a flutter by saying that late Indira Gandhi would have “made us very proud” by the way she would have reacted to the Mumbai terror strike.
As per the report published by the tabloid, Saturday night’s ‘sangeet’ was a lavish affair. Leena Musafir, the sister of the woman with whom Samir is getting married, and her husband Inder, hosted it. Over 800 guests, including regulars at Page 3 dos, attended the party. Later, however, Rahul was quoted in another tabloid, Metro Now, saying, “It seems as if someone entered my house and slapped me.”
The tabloid stated that Rahul made this comment while addressing a meeting of the Congress Working Committee (CWC), which had reportedly been called to discuss the impact of the attack on the party and the country.
'Pakistan will have to pay a heavy price'
Source: REDIFF
M J Akbar
December 02, 2008 16:13 IST
Last Updated: December 02, 2008 19:24 IST
M J Akbar is one of India's best-known journalists and commentators, someone with a deep insight into the Indian people and their mindset. In this first-person, as-told-to piece, Akbar discusses the Mumbai attacks and their relevance for India.
Many people forget that India is a tough nation. Toothless leaders have turned India into a soft nation. People forget that India has fought back Muslim terrorism in Kashmir; Sikh terrorism in Punjab, Christian terrorism in Nagaland and Hindu terrorism in Assam, and amongst the Naxalites [Images].
We have had everything thrown at the Indian nation State. Still, we have stood up. The people of India have shown the courage and ability to believe in their nation and to fight back. But the completely impotent leadership of five years have turned a tough country into a soft State.
I am very sad. I keep feeling that if they protect India as they protect their leaders -- whether it is Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [Images] or Congress President Sonia Gandhi [Images] -- I think I would be safe. Today, India's leaders are safe and India is in panic.
On what India's response should be:
India's proper reaction would be possible if we understand the extent of the disease.
If the disease is cancer, you can't apply band aid. After making a complete mess of security issues for five years by asking Shivraj Patil [Images] to go finally we may have a home minister who doesn't comb his hair and change his clothes. But we want something more than that. If it is cancer, we need chemotherapy, a much more serious exercise. It needs a legislative and executive framework. It needs political mobilisation. People are numbed.
The Indian people have no leadership. You have a prime minister. Did you see him when he addressed the nation? Nobody knew if he was addressing the nation or having a cup of tea?
He looked serious, but he didn't talk to us about our anger and about our anguish. I think this administration is tone deaf to the anguish of the people. They just cannot understand what the people are going through. They just don't understand our pain or our anger. The most important thing is that, perhaps, we have politicised not only the instruments of the State like the police but we have also politicised the understanding of the nature of the problem.
I think the very first thing to do is to ensure security so that it prevents the next attack. If any attack takes place under someones job should go. Don't come to me with alibis.
On the terrorists getting local support:
I am an Indian Muslim and I am very proud of both, being an Indian and a Muslim. I do not see any contradictions. This is my land and I have nowhere else to go.
But can I say because I am an Indian Muslim that no Indian Muslim is involved? Can you, because you are a Hindu, say that no Hindu is involved? We have to behave like Indians first. Not as a Muslim or as a Hindu first. Because we need Hindu votes and Muslim votes and because this government thinks that it needs Muslim votes so it has been in complete denial.
Do you think that these people came across from Pakistan and had no support in Mumbai?
It is not possible. It was a huge operation. Ten people hit nine places and you killed nine of them. You want to say that they went from place to place? Who knows some of them must have slipped away to create new sleeper cells to hit us six months later.
They are hiding things. I would like to believe that there was an underworld connection. Because, Karachi and Mumbai are also linked by drug smuggling. The culture of criminals is aggression. It comes naturally to them. It is not easy for you and I to become aggressive, however angry we are. It does not come naturally to us. These are people who are trained psychologically in aggression. They have no respect for the State. They have no love for the country. And they have no respect for authority.
Why? Because the only face of authority is the corrupt policeman. The criminal gives money in the morning and money in the evening. Why should he have respect for somebody he gives bribes to? For the guy from the underworld his understanding of the Indian State and authority is corruption. He has no patriotism to stop him. Why would he not join hands with the terrorists? In any case, he belongs to another world. We have not even begun to address and discuss this.
On the Pakistan factor
I am tired of giving Pakistan a long rope on some excuse or the other. Everybody is saying this will happen if we do this, that will happen if we do this. Our relations with Pakistan will go, then, let them go. What has our relations with Pakistan brought us except violence and terror? Why should we be in charge of saving Pakistan? For what? Every time they turn around and they say they want evidence. Now, finally we have evidence.
I have been an editor for 35 years from the age of 23. From that time on, since the days of General Zia-ul Haq, I have been hearing 'Pakistan is asking for evidence'. We asked for withdrawal of their support to the movement for Khalistan, they said, 'Oh, we don't know anything about it.' On Kashmir, they kept repeating where is the evidence. Benazir Bhutto [Images] came, she asked for evidence. Nawaz Sharif came, he asked for evidence. I think Pervez Musharraf [Images] asked for less evidence. Now again, they are asking for evidence.
There is a terrorist in Mumbai, captured and arrested. How much more evidence do you want? If what he is saying is not evidence, then how can you get more evidence?
This government is in its 11th hour. Now they will bluff the people to protect their votes. There is no time left for them. The agony of departure will be hard from this government.
On the reaction in the West
The US and Britain have a vested interest in telling India to look within. Why? When Americans die then they can send their air force 7,000 miles and bomb every country to smithereens. But when Indians die, they tell us no, no, you must be patient. You must act like a swami and a yogi. Why? Is an American life more precious than an Indian life? Why should we keep listening to them? But we have a government that keeps listening to them all the time. We don't get tough.
The last time we got tough was after the attack on Parliament. We took some tough actions under Operation Parakram and then there was a certain lull. Three years ago, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was able to tell President George W Bush [Images] that there are no terrorists amongst Indian Muslims. That means that lull continued.
Pakistan must be made to realise that it will have to pay a heavy price. Not necessarily through war, but a heavy price will have to be paid in loss in trade, in cancellation of orders and other engagements. They should pay a heavy price in terms of people to people relations. I am not saying you can freeze a relationship to death, but the message must go out that if there is a crime there will be a penalty. You just can't get away with it.
Let the Pakistan government cooperate with us. But look at how the Pakistan government has buckled down and we are sitting here whimpering.
They want to send some lowly officers to India. For what? Even Pakistan is treating the Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi government with total contempt. They know how weak it is.
Delink Hindu-Muslim relations and Pakistan
Look, you must not confuse the Pakistan issue with the Indian Muslims issue. Their so-called alienation or their economic deprivation is not linked to the issue of Pakistan.
Indian Muslims have nothing to do with Pakistan. They have absolutely no sympathy for Pakistan. They know that Pakistan was the biggest mistake committed in the history of Indian Muslims. They know it. You can ask anyone in Baroda, Bihar or Mumbai. They know how they are suffering the backlash of all the consequences of cross-border terrorism.
Today, they fear retribution from the government, they fear retribution from popular disenchantment and anger. They feel helpless. They feel afraid.
We must understand finally that it is not so much the 'local people', it is the local underworld that is involved in anti-India activities. In 1993, who were involved in terrorism? The underworld. Why have you not done anything about it? The State turns a blind eye to the police and corruption. I don't know how many readers smoke hashish and other stuff, but I am accusing them of cross-border terrorism. Drugs come to India from Afghanistan via Karachi.
What we can do as individuals
If whoever is responsible for protecting the nation fails, then he or she should not be allowed to continue in power. That is the toughest and sharpest message we can give. You can tell that you may be a soft State, but we are a hard people and we are hard voters.
We are not going to forgive you for your lies and deception and for your waffling. How many blasts do we need to understand that? When Jaipur [Images], Ahmedabad [Images], Mumbai and Delhi [Images] happened no one who was genuinely guilty was caught.
We have to understand now that corruption has eaten away vitals of this nation. It is the biggest danger to the security of India. It is not just the case of some spectrum being sold to someone by some minister in. Everyone who is corrupt get out!
It Is a failure all around. We have to be extremely practical and pragmatic. There is great deal to be depressed about as an Indian. Frankly speaking, I feel very angry and upset. I am never upset by the behaviour of our enemies. I am only upset by the betrayal of those I trust.
M J Akbar, editor-in-chief, Covert magazine, spoke to Sheela Bhatt
M J Akbar
December 02, 2008 16:13 IST
Last Updated: December 02, 2008 19:24 IST
M J Akbar is one of India's best-known journalists and commentators, someone with a deep insight into the Indian people and their mindset. In this first-person, as-told-to piece, Akbar discusses the Mumbai attacks and their relevance for India.
Many people forget that India is a tough nation. Toothless leaders have turned India into a soft nation. People forget that India has fought back Muslim terrorism in Kashmir; Sikh terrorism in Punjab, Christian terrorism in Nagaland and Hindu terrorism in Assam, and amongst the Naxalites [Images].
We have had everything thrown at the Indian nation State. Still, we have stood up. The people of India have shown the courage and ability to believe in their nation and to fight back. But the completely impotent leadership of five years have turned a tough country into a soft State.
I am very sad. I keep feeling that if they protect India as they protect their leaders -- whether it is Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [Images] or Congress President Sonia Gandhi [Images] -- I think I would be safe. Today, India's leaders are safe and India is in panic.
On what India's response should be:
India's proper reaction would be possible if we understand the extent of the disease.
If the disease is cancer, you can't apply band aid. After making a complete mess of security issues for five years by asking Shivraj Patil [Images] to go finally we may have a home minister who doesn't comb his hair and change his clothes. But we want something more than that. If it is cancer, we need chemotherapy, a much more serious exercise. It needs a legislative and executive framework. It needs political mobilisation. People are numbed.
The Indian people have no leadership. You have a prime minister. Did you see him when he addressed the nation? Nobody knew if he was addressing the nation or having a cup of tea?
He looked serious, but he didn't talk to us about our anger and about our anguish. I think this administration is tone deaf to the anguish of the people. They just cannot understand what the people are going through. They just don't understand our pain or our anger. The most important thing is that, perhaps, we have politicised not only the instruments of the State like the police but we have also politicised the understanding of the nature of the problem.
I think the very first thing to do is to ensure security so that it prevents the next attack. If any attack takes place under someones job should go. Don't come to me with alibis.
On the terrorists getting local support:
I am an Indian Muslim and I am very proud of both, being an Indian and a Muslim. I do not see any contradictions. This is my land and I have nowhere else to go.
But can I say because I am an Indian Muslim that no Indian Muslim is involved? Can you, because you are a Hindu, say that no Hindu is involved? We have to behave like Indians first. Not as a Muslim or as a Hindu first. Because we need Hindu votes and Muslim votes and because this government thinks that it needs Muslim votes so it has been in complete denial.
Do you think that these people came across from Pakistan and had no support in Mumbai?
It is not possible. It was a huge operation. Ten people hit nine places and you killed nine of them. You want to say that they went from place to place? Who knows some of them must have slipped away to create new sleeper cells to hit us six months later.
They are hiding things. I would like to believe that there was an underworld connection. Because, Karachi and Mumbai are also linked by drug smuggling. The culture of criminals is aggression. It comes naturally to them. It is not easy for you and I to become aggressive, however angry we are. It does not come naturally to us. These are people who are trained psychologically in aggression. They have no respect for the State. They have no love for the country. And they have no respect for authority.
Why? Because the only face of authority is the corrupt policeman. The criminal gives money in the morning and money in the evening. Why should he have respect for somebody he gives bribes to? For the guy from the underworld his understanding of the Indian State and authority is corruption. He has no patriotism to stop him. Why would he not join hands with the terrorists? In any case, he belongs to another world. We have not even begun to address and discuss this.
On the Pakistan factor
I am tired of giving Pakistan a long rope on some excuse or the other. Everybody is saying this will happen if we do this, that will happen if we do this. Our relations with Pakistan will go, then, let them go. What has our relations with Pakistan brought us except violence and terror? Why should we be in charge of saving Pakistan? For what? Every time they turn around and they say they want evidence. Now, finally we have evidence.
I have been an editor for 35 years from the age of 23. From that time on, since the days of General Zia-ul Haq, I have been hearing 'Pakistan is asking for evidence'. We asked for withdrawal of their support to the movement for Khalistan, they said, 'Oh, we don't know anything about it.' On Kashmir, they kept repeating where is the evidence. Benazir Bhutto [Images] came, she asked for evidence. Nawaz Sharif came, he asked for evidence. I think Pervez Musharraf [Images] asked for less evidence. Now again, they are asking for evidence.
There is a terrorist in Mumbai, captured and arrested. How much more evidence do you want? If what he is saying is not evidence, then how can you get more evidence?
This government is in its 11th hour. Now they will bluff the people to protect their votes. There is no time left for them. The agony of departure will be hard from this government.
On the reaction in the West
The US and Britain have a vested interest in telling India to look within. Why? When Americans die then they can send their air force 7,000 miles and bomb every country to smithereens. But when Indians die, they tell us no, no, you must be patient. You must act like a swami and a yogi. Why? Is an American life more precious than an Indian life? Why should we keep listening to them? But we have a government that keeps listening to them all the time. We don't get tough.
The last time we got tough was after the attack on Parliament. We took some tough actions under Operation Parakram and then there was a certain lull. Three years ago, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was able to tell President George W Bush [Images] that there are no terrorists amongst Indian Muslims. That means that lull continued.
Pakistan must be made to realise that it will have to pay a heavy price. Not necessarily through war, but a heavy price will have to be paid in loss in trade, in cancellation of orders and other engagements. They should pay a heavy price in terms of people to people relations. I am not saying you can freeze a relationship to death, but the message must go out that if there is a crime there will be a penalty. You just can't get away with it.
Let the Pakistan government cooperate with us. But look at how the Pakistan government has buckled down and we are sitting here whimpering.
They want to send some lowly officers to India. For what? Even Pakistan is treating the Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi government with total contempt. They know how weak it is.
Delink Hindu-Muslim relations and Pakistan
Look, you must not confuse the Pakistan issue with the Indian Muslims issue. Their so-called alienation or their economic deprivation is not linked to the issue of Pakistan.
Indian Muslims have nothing to do with Pakistan. They have absolutely no sympathy for Pakistan. They know that Pakistan was the biggest mistake committed in the history of Indian Muslims. They know it. You can ask anyone in Baroda, Bihar or Mumbai. They know how they are suffering the backlash of all the consequences of cross-border terrorism.
Today, they fear retribution from the government, they fear retribution from popular disenchantment and anger. They feel helpless. They feel afraid.
We must understand finally that it is not so much the 'local people', it is the local underworld that is involved in anti-India activities. In 1993, who were involved in terrorism? The underworld. Why have you not done anything about it? The State turns a blind eye to the police and corruption. I don't know how many readers smoke hashish and other stuff, but I am accusing them of cross-border terrorism. Drugs come to India from Afghanistan via Karachi.
What we can do as individuals
If whoever is responsible for protecting the nation fails, then he or she should not be allowed to continue in power. That is the toughest and sharpest message we can give. You can tell that you may be a soft State, but we are a hard people and we are hard voters.
We are not going to forgive you for your lies and deception and for your waffling. How many blasts do we need to understand that? When Jaipur [Images], Ahmedabad [Images], Mumbai and Delhi [Images] happened no one who was genuinely guilty was caught.
We have to understand now that corruption has eaten away vitals of this nation. It is the biggest danger to the security of India. It is not just the case of some spectrum being sold to someone by some minister in. Everyone who is corrupt get out!
It Is a failure all around. We have to be extremely practical and pragmatic. There is great deal to be depressed about as an Indian. Frankly speaking, I feel very angry and upset. I am never upset by the behaviour of our enemies. I am only upset by the betrayal of those I trust.
M J Akbar, editor-in-chief, Covert magazine, spoke to Sheela Bhatt
December 01, 2008
Russian analyst predicts decline and breakup of U.S.
19:31 | 24/ 11/ 2008
MOSCOW, November 24 (RIA Novosti) - A leading Russian political analyst has said the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the country is heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts.
Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily Izvestia published on Monday: "The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse."
The paper said Panarin's dire predictions for the U.S. economy, initially made at an international conference in Australia 10 years ago at a time when the economy appeared strong, have been given more credence by this year's events.
When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: "It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator."
When asked who would replace the U.S. in regulating world markets, he said: "Two countries could assume this role: China, with its vast reserves, and Russia, which could play the role of a regulator in Eurasia."
Asked why he expected the U.S. to break up into separate parts, he said: "A whole range of reasons. Firstly, the financial problems in the U.S. will get worse. Millions of citizens there have lost their savings. Prices and unemployment are on the rise. General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse, and this means that whole cities will be left without work. Governors are already insistently demanding money from the federal center. Dissatisfaction is growing, and at the moment it is only being held back by the elections and the hope that Obama can work miracles. But by spring, it will be clear that there are no miracles."
He also cited the "vulnerable political setup", "lack of unified national laws", and "divisions among the elite, which have become clear in these crisis conditions."
He predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts - the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong.
He even suggested that "we could claim Alaska - it was only granted on lease, after all."
On the fate of the U.S. dollar, he said: "In 2006 a secret agreement was reached between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. on a common Amero currency as a new monetary unit. This could signal preparations to replace the dollar. The one-hundred dollar bills that have flooded the world could be simply frozen. Under the pretext, let's say, that terrorists are forging them and they need to be checked."
When asked how Russia should react to his vision of the future, Panarin said: "Develop the ruble as a regional currency. Create a fully functioning oil exchange, trading in rubles... We must break the strings tying us to the financial Titanic, which in my view will soon sink."
Panarin, 60, is a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and has authored several books on information warfare
MOSCOW, November 24 (RIA Novosti) - A leading Russian political analyst has said the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the country is heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts.
Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily Izvestia published on Monday: "The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse."
The paper said Panarin's dire predictions for the U.S. economy, initially made at an international conference in Australia 10 years ago at a time when the economy appeared strong, have been given more credence by this year's events.
When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: "It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator."
When asked who would replace the U.S. in regulating world markets, he said: "Two countries could assume this role: China, with its vast reserves, and Russia, which could play the role of a regulator in Eurasia."
Asked why he expected the U.S. to break up into separate parts, he said: "A whole range of reasons. Firstly, the financial problems in the U.S. will get worse. Millions of citizens there have lost their savings. Prices and unemployment are on the rise. General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse, and this means that whole cities will be left without work. Governors are already insistently demanding money from the federal center. Dissatisfaction is growing, and at the moment it is only being held back by the elections and the hope that Obama can work miracles. But by spring, it will be clear that there are no miracles."
He also cited the "vulnerable political setup", "lack of unified national laws", and "divisions among the elite, which have become clear in these crisis conditions."
He predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts - the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong.
He even suggested that "we could claim Alaska - it was only granted on lease, after all."
On the fate of the U.S. dollar, he said: "In 2006 a secret agreement was reached between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. on a common Amero currency as a new monetary unit. This could signal preparations to replace the dollar. The one-hundred dollar bills that have flooded the world could be simply frozen. Under the pretext, let's say, that terrorists are forging them and they need to be checked."
When asked how Russia should react to his vision of the future, Panarin said: "Develop the ruble as a regional currency. Create a fully functioning oil exchange, trading in rubles... We must break the strings tying us to the financial Titanic, which in my view will soon sink."
Panarin, 60, is a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and has authored several books on information warfare
Russia returns to Latin America
18:02 | 28/ 11/ 2008
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Fedyashin) - "Russia has returned to Latin America, including Cuba," Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said in Havana about the results of his five-day tour of the southern continent.
On November 24-28, he has been to Peru, Brazil, Venezuela and Cuba, visiting more countries in South America than any other Russian leader has been to in one go. In fact, no other top Russian leader has visited Venezuela before.
This spurred the optimism of Russia's experts on Latin America and everyone connected with it in the past decades. They did not expect any Russian leader to say what Medvedev has said in Cuba, although they had spent years reminding the Kremlin about the "Latin American comrades."
The Russian delegation has signed the largest number of agreements and memorandums ever, from traditional military and cultural contracts to multilevel agreements on nuclear power generation, joint oil and gas production, construction of tankers, use of high technologies, and establishment of banks.
Although very important, they are only part of the evolving picture. Making the effort to reclaim Russia's position in Latin America is a good start, but the Kremlin will have to work hard to keep it. It is not enough to send Tu-160 strategic bombers, the Pyotr Veliky missile cruiser or the Admiral Chabanenko destroyer there, even though their joint fire power exceeds that of all South American countries taken together.
"A few Russian ships are not going to change the balance of power," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said when asked about Russian warships off Venezuela during Medvedev's visit. And she is right, although a demonstration of the Russian naval flag was a good thing.
An analysis of America's attitude to Russia's reviving relations with South America makes an interesting study. For the past two decades, the Americans pretended not to be concerned about Russia's attention to the continent, and in particular its close friendship with Venezuela. They could be irritated by it, but they were definitely unconcerned.
But when Medvedev's trip to Latin America was announced, the U.S. media published articles titled "Russia poses challenge to Obama" and "Russia's new presence in Latin America."
According to them, Barack Obama is trying to find a way out of the economic crisis and ensure a smooth transition of power in the White House. In principle, he likes Moscow, they wrote, but is too busy now to give a proper response to the Russians, who took advantage of the situation to stage a provocation in the U.S. backyard.
But Medvedev's tour was planned long before the November 4 presidential elections in the United States, when nobody could say definitely who would win, McCain or Obama. And I don't see any logic in the media's hint that Moscow should have waited until Obama assumed office and determined his Latin American policy.
The overall U.S. sentiment is that "Russians have nothing to do in Latin America." When all newspapers write the same, it usually means that they had been leaked information from the State Department or the White House. This shows that the White House is seriously worried by Russia's return to Latin America.
Besides, diplomats like to present their rivals' smart moves only as minor achievements, especially when they themselves have missed the chance.
The United States will never fully abandon its backyard, because former paratroopers (Venezuela), Native Americans (Bolivia), bishops (Paraguay), the extreme left or moderately left politicians will not remain in power forever there.
When Washington comes to from the shocks of the elections, the financial crisis and the nearly total neglect of Latin America under the Bush administration, it will make a U-turn and head back to its southern neighbors. And we will find it very hard to withstand its economic and political offensive.
Latin Americans know that life without close ties with the United States will be very difficult despite Russia's rekindled love. The Kremlin should remember this and plan its strategy in Latin America so as to prevent a repetition of past mistakes, when it jettisoned some friends there, for example Cuba.
Immediately after winning the elections, Obama started rethinking the U.S. policy regarding Cuba. The latest issue of The Nation carried Sean Penn's "Conversations with Raul Castro about Obama, Guantanamo and the Pentagon."
Castro granted the interview to Penn, an old-time Democratic supporter and a personal friend of Obama, long before the November elections. The Cuban leader told him that he would meet with Obama.
"We should meet in a neutral place," he said. "You asked if I would accept to meet with [Obama] in Washington. I would have to think about it."
So, Obama will most likely re-discover Cuba, because that's what most Americans, including the Miami Cubans, want.
Russia will also have to compete for Cuba's attention with China, France, Canada and Spain.
During his Latin American tour, Medvedev spoke about such exotic things as the use of national currencies in Russian-Venezuelan settlements, visa-free travel to Brazil and Venezuela, and Brazilian football schools in Russia. The president was also awarded the two countries' highest orders.
However, his agenda also included much more important issues - and much more serious than sending Russian warships to the continent. Some of them are still on paper, but if they are implemented, Moscow will surge to the forefront of the global financial scene.
The main event happened after Medvedev had arrived in Brazil from Peru, where he announced a decision that can change the BRIC group of Brazil, Russia, India and China from a banking term into an international organization, or at the very least a consultative forum.
The Russian president said after his meeting with his Brazilian counterpart that Russia would host a BRIC summit in 2009. The BRIC countries are comparable to the European Union economically and financially, and by far surpass them in terms of energy resources. So, the world should respect their opinions.
The most important part of Medvedev's visit to Latin America is that he has made it. Since the beginning of Gorbachev's perestroika, Russia has been trying to forget about Latin America, for some obscure reason, and by doing so destroyed many achievements scored there by the Soviet Union.
Nobody knows how long this unfortunate situation would have lasted if not for George W. Bush, who placed the southern neighbors on ice.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Fedyashin) - "Russia has returned to Latin America, including Cuba," Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said in Havana about the results of his five-day tour of the southern continent.
On November 24-28, he has been to Peru, Brazil, Venezuela and Cuba, visiting more countries in South America than any other Russian leader has been to in one go. In fact, no other top Russian leader has visited Venezuela before.
This spurred the optimism of Russia's experts on Latin America and everyone connected with it in the past decades. They did not expect any Russian leader to say what Medvedev has said in Cuba, although they had spent years reminding the Kremlin about the "Latin American comrades."
The Russian delegation has signed the largest number of agreements and memorandums ever, from traditional military and cultural contracts to multilevel agreements on nuclear power generation, joint oil and gas production, construction of tankers, use of high technologies, and establishment of banks.
Although very important, they are only part of the evolving picture. Making the effort to reclaim Russia's position in Latin America is a good start, but the Kremlin will have to work hard to keep it. It is not enough to send Tu-160 strategic bombers, the Pyotr Veliky missile cruiser or the Admiral Chabanenko destroyer there, even though their joint fire power exceeds that of all South American countries taken together.
"A few Russian ships are not going to change the balance of power," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said when asked about Russian warships off Venezuela during Medvedev's visit. And she is right, although a demonstration of the Russian naval flag was a good thing.
An analysis of America's attitude to Russia's reviving relations with South America makes an interesting study. For the past two decades, the Americans pretended not to be concerned about Russia's attention to the continent, and in particular its close friendship with Venezuela. They could be irritated by it, but they were definitely unconcerned.
But when Medvedev's trip to Latin America was announced, the U.S. media published articles titled "Russia poses challenge to Obama" and "Russia's new presence in Latin America."
According to them, Barack Obama is trying to find a way out of the economic crisis and ensure a smooth transition of power in the White House. In principle, he likes Moscow, they wrote, but is too busy now to give a proper response to the Russians, who took advantage of the situation to stage a provocation in the U.S. backyard.
But Medvedev's tour was planned long before the November 4 presidential elections in the United States, when nobody could say definitely who would win, McCain or Obama. And I don't see any logic in the media's hint that Moscow should have waited until Obama assumed office and determined his Latin American policy.
The overall U.S. sentiment is that "Russians have nothing to do in Latin America." When all newspapers write the same, it usually means that they had been leaked information from the State Department or the White House. This shows that the White House is seriously worried by Russia's return to Latin America.
Besides, diplomats like to present their rivals' smart moves only as minor achievements, especially when they themselves have missed the chance.
The United States will never fully abandon its backyard, because former paratroopers (Venezuela), Native Americans (Bolivia), bishops (Paraguay), the extreme left or moderately left politicians will not remain in power forever there.
When Washington comes to from the shocks of the elections, the financial crisis and the nearly total neglect of Latin America under the Bush administration, it will make a U-turn and head back to its southern neighbors. And we will find it very hard to withstand its economic and political offensive.
Latin Americans know that life without close ties with the United States will be very difficult despite Russia's rekindled love. The Kremlin should remember this and plan its strategy in Latin America so as to prevent a repetition of past mistakes, when it jettisoned some friends there, for example Cuba.
Immediately after winning the elections, Obama started rethinking the U.S. policy regarding Cuba. The latest issue of The Nation carried Sean Penn's "Conversations with Raul Castro about Obama, Guantanamo and the Pentagon."
Castro granted the interview to Penn, an old-time Democratic supporter and a personal friend of Obama, long before the November elections. The Cuban leader told him that he would meet with Obama.
"We should meet in a neutral place," he said. "You asked if I would accept to meet with [Obama] in Washington. I would have to think about it."
So, Obama will most likely re-discover Cuba, because that's what most Americans, including the Miami Cubans, want.
Russia will also have to compete for Cuba's attention with China, France, Canada and Spain.
During his Latin American tour, Medvedev spoke about such exotic things as the use of national currencies in Russian-Venezuelan settlements, visa-free travel to Brazil and Venezuela, and Brazilian football schools in Russia. The president was also awarded the two countries' highest orders.
However, his agenda also included much more important issues - and much more serious than sending Russian warships to the continent. Some of them are still on paper, but if they are implemented, Moscow will surge to the forefront of the global financial scene.
The main event happened after Medvedev had arrived in Brazil from Peru, where he announced a decision that can change the BRIC group of Brazil, Russia, India and China from a banking term into an international organization, or at the very least a consultative forum.
The Russian president said after his meeting with his Brazilian counterpart that Russia would host a BRIC summit in 2009. The BRIC countries are comparable to the European Union economically and financially, and by far surpass them in terms of energy resources. So, the world should respect their opinions.
The most important part of Medvedev's visit to Latin America is that he has made it. Since the beginning of Gorbachev's perestroika, Russia has been trying to forget about Latin America, for some obscure reason, and by doing so destroyed many achievements scored there by the Soviet Union.
Nobody knows how long this unfortunate situation would have lasted if not for George W. Bush, who placed the southern neighbors on ice.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
Mumbai 26/11: Still Politically Incorrect!
By Swati Parashar
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, in response to the 11 July 2006 train blasts in Mumbai, had stated; “No-one can make India kneel. The wheels of our economy will move on. India will continue to walk tall, and with confidence. Mumbai stands tall once again as the symbol of a united India. An inclusive India. We will win this war against terror. Nothing will break our resolve.” His statement certainly did not break the resolve of the jihadi terrorists as they indulged in the gory bloodbath in Mumbai for 60 hours beginning on 26 November 2008. As political drama continues to unfold over this tragedy and the blame game rages on, let us reflect on the ‘politics’ of the ‘politically correct’.
Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan, the NSG commando who sacrificed his life so that we could live to see another day, would not have expected such callousness from the political leaders of our state who did not even have the time to attend his funeral. This is not surprising as only a few months back none of our ‘eminent’ national leaders had any time to attend the funeral of Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, the military legend of this country. Defence Minister A. K. Antony had explained his absence by stating that the government had anyways made a rare gesture to accord a state funeral to General Manekshaw! Our political masters bestow such ‘favours’ on our valiant soldiers that it would shame us forever. No wonder Major Unnikrishnan’s father prefers suicide to accepting condolence visits from any politician. He spoke about his brave son as not just belonging to Kerala alone but to the entire nation. Mr. Raj Thakre, while hiding in your underground bunker, we hope you take note of this. You had thought that you could appropriate the ‘Marathi’ identity to suit your vicious and divisive politics. Hopefully you have learnt the lesson that Mumbai is not your fiefdom, neither does it belong to Maharashtra alone. Mumbai belongs to India and all of India bleeds with Mumbai at this hour. The NSG commandos who fought to secure Mumbai are more of a ‘Marathi Manoos’ than either you or any of your goons!
Our politicians have no respect for our security forces or for the citizens of this country. Would Mr. R R Patil say that “small incidents like this keep happening in big cities”, if his security cover was taken away from him while he waited at the CST station on that ill fated evening? Mr. Patil needs to be reminded that this ‘small incident’ resulted in the Maharashtra Anti Terrorism Squad losing its core team of brilliant officers apart from the other casualties. Our elite army commando units are wasted in securing those who make us completely insecure. At our expense our politicians enjoy highest level of security cover while we, the taxpayers, continue to be cannon fodder for terrorists as soft targets. The Z plus security that many of our politicians enjoy, consists of 36 security personnel including black cat commandos, NSG, SPG, CRPF and ITBP. Bullet proof cars and electronic pulse jammers are also part of the elite security entourage of ‘eminent’ personalities such as Amar Singh, Rajnath Singh, Priyanka Vadra, Rahul Gandhi, Jayalalitha and Vinay Katiyar, to name a few. Mind you, not one of these people holds any constitutional position to enjoy this highest level of security protection by our elite commando units. The Z plus security cover is often distributed as a gift hamper to buy favours such as in the case of Amar Singh during the nuclear deal related numerical drama in the parliament.
Subsequent to Home Minister Shivraj Patil’s resignation (finally!), Railway Minister Lalu Yadav quipped, ‘kya barkha jab krishi sukhani’, meaning that there is no purpose of rain when the crops have died. He wants us to forget that he is part of this government and cabinet which is supposed to function on collective responsibility. However, for Lalu Yadav, being ‘collective’ or being ‘responsible’ did not mean support for the ban on SIMI, which has established terrorist linkages. Lalu was just too keen to protect his ‘alpasankhyak’ (minority) votes. Politicians like Lalu thrive on creating vote bank constituencies. Let us not forget that this ‘garibon ka neta’ (leader of the poor) had once justified the perpetuation of ‘garibi’ (poverty) in Bihar, on the grounds that the poor are his constituency. He needed them to sustain his politics. On Shivraj Patil’s resignation, Lalu further adds, “Whatever is happening in the country is our priority... the ministerial post doesn't matter”, for he can pass it on to dear wife at any time!
The voice of the ‘oppressed’ and the ‘marginalised’ proletariat, Comrade Brinda Karat of the CPM accuses the BJP of “nakli deshbhakti” (pseudo-patriotism) and of linking religion with terrorism. Comrade Karat’s party have no better claims to patriotism as far as India is concerned. Plunging the country into serious political crisis over the Indo-US nuclear deal, on argument that it was anti-Muslim and then joining hands with Mayawati, the communists had subjugated the foreign policy to religion. Comrade Karat and her cadres would have probably supported a nuclear deal with China as ‘asli swamibhakti’ (real sycophancy). Ms. Karat wants the international community to put pressure on Pakistan to cooperate with India on counter terrorism. Does she or any of her red brigade comrades realise that only the United States (an enemy they love to hate) can put any real pressure on Pakistan? Ms. Karat has stated that, “it has been an utter failure of the Congress government who could not strengthen the intelligence agencies, ensure proper coordination between state and central agencies or arm our agencies with enough software and hardware to pre-empt such attacks.” Selective amnesia here? Ms. Karat your party was an important constituent of this UPA government for four years of their governance (or lack of it!).
Consider this! The PM gets out of his deep slumber and still sleep-walking, calls an all party meeting to discuss the situation after Mumbai. The leader of the biggest opposition party, which does not miss an opportunity to display its nationalist credentials, L K. Advani does not even deem it necessary to attend the meeting. He is in Rajasthan campaigning for the assembly elections! The petty, parochial politics does not allow him to participate in such an important meeting concerning national security. Mr. Advani, did these jihadi terrorists represent the ‘secular’ ethos of Mr. M. A. Jinnah which only you happened to articulate? Narendra Modi, the saviour of the majority community of this country, has one crore rupees to offer to the slain police officers in Maharashtra (whom he had denounced during their lifetime). I wonder if Mr. Modi extended any compassion or compensation to the five crew members of the fishing trawler 'Kuber' that was hijacked by the terrorists. These crew members were brutally murdered by the terrorists. BJP leader, Rajiv Pratap Ruddy, slams the government for their failure to tackle terrorism and rants his party’s election manifesto in a media debate. We are left speechless. He forgets that he belongs to a party that had compromised the security of this country in an unprecedented manner not many years ago.
The then Defence Minister of the NDA, Jaswant Singh, ‘valiantly’ escorted the deadliest jihadi terrorists out of Indian jails during the Kandahar hostage crisis. Let us not even talk about the Parliament Attack, when all the NDA did was to mobilise the army at the border and then move them back.
I would also like to ask our ‘politically correct’ politicians, if terrorism has no religion should counter terrorism strategies be devised according to religious communities? As for people in India and abroad who are worried about home grown ‘Hindutva’ terror in Malegaon, the very fact that this could come under intense public scrutiny in this country, shows that religious concerns do not decide public outrage over terrorism. While the jihadi terrorists have fostered effective cooperation across national boundaries, our political leaders have failed to even foster consensus on counter terrorism mechanism and show solidarity with the people at this time of national emergency. Some of us could argue that after all we get the rulers we deserve, for we are the ones who vote for them. Not true entirely. Many of these ministers have been installed through the back channels of the Rajya Sabha (Upper House), without having to face the electorate directly. Minister of External Affairs, Pranab Mukherjee, who has held important ministerial berths before, never enjoyed the mandate of the people. His first Lok Sabha (Lower House) stint in many years of his ministerial life started only in 2004. Minister of Human Resources Development, Arjun Singh, lost two successive elections to the Lower House (once even forfeiting his deposit!). Now he is an honourable member of the Rajya Sabha and also of the Sonia Gandhi coterie. Just jettisoned Minister of Home Affairs, Shivraj Patil, lost the last Lok Sabha elections in Latur but followed Arjun Singh’s footsteps towards ministerial glory!
We certainly don’t deserve what we get!
Abraham Lincoln had said; “The ballot is stronger than the bullet.” I leave the judgement to you!
(Swati Parashar is a PhD Candidate at the Department of Politics and International Relations, Lancaster University, United Kingdom. She can be contacted at swatiparashar@hotmail.com)
AFTER MUMBAI : POINTS FOR ACTION
B.RAMAN
( This incorporates some of the points coming to my mind, but is by no means a totally comprehensive list. I have deliberately not touched upon the Pakistan dimension. I would like to wait for some more details before commenting on the action that needs to be taken)
POINT 1: Set up a National Commission of professionals with no political agenda, in consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, to enquire into all the major terrorist strikes that have taken place in the Indian territory outside Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) since November,2007, and task it to submit its report within four months, with no extensions given. Its charter will be not the investigation of the criminal cases arising from these terrorist strikes, but the investigation of the deficiencies and sins of commission and omission in our counter-terrorism agencies at the Centre and in the States, which made these strikes possible.
POINT 2: Induct proved experts in terrorism and counter-terrorism from the Intelligence Bureau (IB), the State Police and the Army into the R&AW at senior levels. Presently, the R&AW does not have any such expertise at senior levels. Of the four officers at the top of the pyramid, two are generalists, one is an expert in Pakistan (Political) and the other in China (Political).
POINT 3: A similar induction from the State Police and the Army would be necessary in the case of the IB too. Since I have no personal knowledge of the officers at the top of its pyramid, I am not in a position to be specific.
POINT 4: Make the IB the nodal point for all liaison with foreign intelligence and security agencies in respect of terrorism, instead of the R&AW.Give the IB direct access to all foreign internal intelligence and security agencies, instead of having to go through the R&AW.
POINT 5: Have a common data base on terrorism shared by the IB and the R&AW directly accessible by authorized officers of the two organizations through a secure password.
POINT 6: Make the Multi-Disciplinary Centre of the IB function as it was meant to function when it was created----- as a centre for the continuous identification of gaps and deficiencies in the available intelligence and for removing them and for effective follow-up action.
POINT 7: Revive the covert action capability of the R&AW and strengthen it. Its charter should make it clear that it will operate only in foreign territory and not in Indian territory. Give it specific, time-bound tasks. All covert actions should be cleared and co-ordinated by the R&AW. Other agencies should not be allowed to indulge in covert actions.
POINT 8: The National Security Guards (NSG) was created as a special intervention force to deal with terrorist situations such as hijacking and hostage-taking. Stop using it for VIP security purposes. Station one battalion each of the NSG in Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and Bangalore. Ensure that its regional deployment does not affect its in-service training. Review the rapid response capability of the NSG in the light of the Mumbai experience and remove loopholes. In handling the Kandahar hijacking of 1999 and the Mumbai terrorist strikes, the delay in the response of the NSG would appear to have been due to a delay in getting an aircraft for moving the NSG personnel to Mumbai from Delhi.
POINT 9:Give the police in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and Bangalore a special intervention capability to supplement that of the NSG.
POINT 10:After the series of hijackings by the Khalistani terrorists in the early 1980s, Indira Gandhi had approved a proposal for the training of Indian experts in dealing with hostage situations and hostage negotiation techniques by foreign intelligence agencies, which have acknowledged expertise in these fields. The training slots offered by the foreign agencies have been largely monopolized by the IB and the R&AW. The utilization of these training slots and the selection of officers for the training should be decided by the NSA---- with one-third of the slots going to Central agencies, one-third to the NSG and one-third to the State Police. It is important to build up a core of terrorism and counter-terrorism expertise in all metro towns.
POINT 11: The IB’s Multi-Disciplinary Centre should have a constantly updated database of all serving and retired officers at the Centre and in the States, who had undergone overseas training, and also of all serving and retired officers and non-governmental figures who have expertise in terrorism and counter-terrorism so that their expertise could be tapped, when needed.
POINT 12: Strengthen the role of the police stations in counter-terrorism in all major cities. Make it clear to all Station House Officers that their record in preventing acts of terrorism, in contributing to the investigation and prosecution of terrorism-related cases and in consequence management after a terrorist strike will be an important factor in assessing their suitability for further promotion. Revive and strengthen the beat system, revive and intensify the local enquiries for suspicious activities in all railway stations, bus termini, airports, hotels, inns and other places and improve police-community relations. An important observation of the UK’s Security and Intelligence Committee of the Prime Minister, which enquired into the London blasts of July,2005, was that no counter-terrorism strategy will succeed unless it is based on the co-operation of the community from which the terrorists have arisen. The UK now has what they call a community-based counter-terrorism strategy. The willingness of different communities to co-operate will largely depend on the relations of the police officers at different levels with the leaders and prominent members of the communities.
POINT 13: Adopt the British practice of having Counter-terrorism Security Advisers in Police Stations. Post them in all urban police stations. Their job will be to constantly train the PS staff in the performance of their counter-terrorism duties, to improve relations with the communities and to closely interact with owners of public places such as hotels, restaurants, shopping malls etc and voluntarily advise them on the security precautions to be taken to prevent terrorist strikes on soft targets and to mitigate the consequences if strikes do take place despite the best efforts of the police to prevent them.
POINT 14: Stop using the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) as a dumping ground for retired officers, who are favoured by the Government. The NSCS cannot be effective in its role of national security management if it is not looked upon with respect by the serving officers. The serving officers look upon the retired officers of the NSCS as living in the past and in a make-believe world of their own totally cut off from the ground realities of today in national security management. The NSCS should be manned only by serving officers of acknowledged capability for thinking and action.
POINT 15: Strengthen the role of the National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) as a Government-sponsored think tank of non-governmental experts in security matters to assist the NSCA and the NSA. Give it specific terms of reference instead of letting it free lance as it often does. It should be discouraged from undertaking esoteric studies.
POINT 16: Set up a separate Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) to deal with internal security. Assessment of intelligence having a bearing on internal security requires different expertise and different analytical tools than assessment of intelligence having a bearing on external security. In 1983, Indira Gandhi, then Prime Minister, bifurcated the JIC and created a separate JIC for internal security. Rajiv Gandhi reversed her decision. Her decision was wise and needs to be revived.
POINT 17: Set up a National Counter-Terrorism Centre (NCTC)under the National Security Adviser (NSA) to ensure joint operational action in all terrorism-related matters. It can be patterned after a similar institution set up in the US under Director, National Intelligence after 9/11. The National Commission set up by the US Congress to enquire into the 9/11 terrorist strikes had expressed the view that better co-ordination among the various agencies will not be enough and that what was required was a joint action command similar to the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Armed Forces. Its tasks should be to monitor intelligence collection by various agencies, avoid duplication of efforts and resources, integrate the intelligence flowing from different agencies and foreign agencies, analyse and assess the integrated intelligence and monitor follow-up action by the Police, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other concerned agencies. Every agency is equally and jointly involved and responsible for the entire counter-terrorism process starting from collection to action on the intelligence collected. If such a system had existed, post-Mumbai complaints such as those of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW) that the advisories issued by them on the possibility of a sea-borne attack by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) on Mumbai were not acted upon by the Mumbai Police would not have arisen because the IB and the R&AW would have been as responsible for follow-up action as the Mumbai Police.
POINT 18: The practice of the privileged direct access to the Prime Minister by the chiefs of the IB and the R&AW, which came into force under Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi, should be vigorously enforced. This privileged direct access is utilised by the intelligence chiefs to bring their concerns over national security and over inaction by the agencies responsible for follow-up on their reports to the personal notice of the Prime Minister and seek his intervention. If the intelligence chiefs had brought to the notice of the Prime Minister the alleged inaction of the Mumbai Police on their reports, he might have intervened and issued the required political directive to the Chief Minister of Maharashtra.
POINT 19: Either create a separate Ministry of Internal Security or strengthen the role of the existing Department of Internal Security in the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and make it responsible for dealing with internal security operationally under the over-all supervision of the Minister for Home Affairs.
POINT 20:Either create a separate federal terrorism investigation agency or empower the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate all cases involving terrorism of a pan-Indian dimension. It need not take up cases where terrorism is confined to a single state or a small region such as terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir or the Al Umma in Tamil Nadu. It should be able to take up the cases for investigation without the need for prior permission from the Governments of the States affected. It should not have any responsibility for investigating crimes other than terrorism. If its charter is expanded to cover other crimes too, there will be political opposition. There is a lot of confusion about this concept of a federal terrorism investigation agency. Many critics ask when the IB is there, what is the need for another central agency. The IB is an intelligence collection agency and not an investigation agency. The IB has no locus standi in the Indian criminal laws. It collects intelligence and not evidence usable in a court of law. It cannot arrest and interrogate a suspect or search premises or perform other tasks of a similar nature, which can be performed only by police officers of the rank of Station House Officers. The IB officers are not recognized as equivalent to SHOs.
POINT 21: Set up a task force consisting of three senior and distinguished Directors-General of Police (DGPs) and ask it to come up with a list of recommendations for strengthening the powers of the police in respect of prevention, investigation and prosecution of terrorism-related offences and the capabilities of the Police in counter-terrorism and implement its recommendations. This is the only way of getting round the present political deadlock over the revival of the Prevention of Terrorism ACT (POTA).
POINT 22: Expedite the erection of the border fence on the border with Bangladesh without worrying about opposition from Bangladesh.
POINT 23: Start a crash programme for the identification of illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and for deporting them. Ban the employment of immigrants from Bangladesh anywhere in Indian territory.
POINT 24: Strict immigration control is an importat part of counter-terrorism The post—9/11 safety of the US is partly due to the tightening up of immigration procedures and their strict enforcement. Among the best practices adopted by the US and emulated by others are: Photographing and finger-printing of all foreigners on arrival, closer questioning of Pakistanis and persons of Pakistani origin etc. We have not yet adopted any of these practices. Hotels and other places of residence should be banned from giving rooms to persons without a departure card and without a valid immigration stamp in their passports. They should be required to take Xerox copies of the first page and the page containing the immigration stamp of the passports of all foreigners and also the departure card stapled to the passport and send them to their local Police Station every morning. All immigration relaxations introduced in the case of Pakistani and Bangladesdhi nationals and persons of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin should be cancelled with immediate effect. The requirement of police reporting by them should be rigorously enforced. It should be made obligatory for all persons hosting Pakistanis and Bangladeshis to report to the local police about their guests. A vigorous drive should be undertaken for tracing all Pakistanis and Bangladeshis overstaying in India after the expiry of their visas and for expelling them.
POINT 25: The MEA’s capability for terrorism-related diplomacy should be strengthened by creating a separate Division for this purpose. It should continuously brief all foreign governments about the role of Pakistan and Bangladesh in supporting terrorism in Indian territory and press for action against them.
POINT 26: The Mumbai strikes have revealed serious gaps in our maritime security on our Western coast. This is partly the result of our over-focus on the Look East policy and the neglect of the Look West dimension. This was corrected earlier this year. Despite this, there are apparently major gaps and an alleged failure by the Naval and Coast Guard authorities to act on the reports of the IB and the R&AW about likely sea –borne threats from the LET. The identification and removal of the gaps need immediate attention. The Mumbai off-shore oil installations and the nuclear and space establishments on the Western coast are also vulnerable to sea-borne terrorist strikes. (1-12-08)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
( This incorporates some of the points coming to my mind, but is by no means a totally comprehensive list. I have deliberately not touched upon the Pakistan dimension. I would like to wait for some more details before commenting on the action that needs to be taken)
POINT 1: Set up a National Commission of professionals with no political agenda, in consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, to enquire into all the major terrorist strikes that have taken place in the Indian territory outside Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) since November,2007, and task it to submit its report within four months, with no extensions given. Its charter will be not the investigation of the criminal cases arising from these terrorist strikes, but the investigation of the deficiencies and sins of commission and omission in our counter-terrorism agencies at the Centre and in the States, which made these strikes possible.
POINT 2: Induct proved experts in terrorism and counter-terrorism from the Intelligence Bureau (IB), the State Police and the Army into the R&AW at senior levels. Presently, the R&AW does not have any such expertise at senior levels. Of the four officers at the top of the pyramid, two are generalists, one is an expert in Pakistan (Political) and the other in China (Political).
POINT 3: A similar induction from the State Police and the Army would be necessary in the case of the IB too. Since I have no personal knowledge of the officers at the top of its pyramid, I am not in a position to be specific.
POINT 4: Make the IB the nodal point for all liaison with foreign intelligence and security agencies in respect of terrorism, instead of the R&AW.Give the IB direct access to all foreign internal intelligence and security agencies, instead of having to go through the R&AW.
POINT 5: Have a common data base on terrorism shared by the IB and the R&AW directly accessible by authorized officers of the two organizations through a secure password.
POINT 6: Make the Multi-Disciplinary Centre of the IB function as it was meant to function when it was created----- as a centre for the continuous identification of gaps and deficiencies in the available intelligence and for removing them and for effective follow-up action.
POINT 7: Revive the covert action capability of the R&AW and strengthen it. Its charter should make it clear that it will operate only in foreign territory and not in Indian territory. Give it specific, time-bound tasks. All covert actions should be cleared and co-ordinated by the R&AW. Other agencies should not be allowed to indulge in covert actions.
POINT 8: The National Security Guards (NSG) was created as a special intervention force to deal with terrorist situations such as hijacking and hostage-taking. Stop using it for VIP security purposes. Station one battalion each of the NSG in Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and Bangalore. Ensure that its regional deployment does not affect its in-service training. Review the rapid response capability of the NSG in the light of the Mumbai experience and remove loopholes. In handling the Kandahar hijacking of 1999 and the Mumbai terrorist strikes, the delay in the response of the NSG would appear to have been due to a delay in getting an aircraft for moving the NSG personnel to Mumbai from Delhi.
POINT 9:Give the police in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and Bangalore a special intervention capability to supplement that of the NSG.
POINT 10:After the series of hijackings by the Khalistani terrorists in the early 1980s, Indira Gandhi had approved a proposal for the training of Indian experts in dealing with hostage situations and hostage negotiation techniques by foreign intelligence agencies, which have acknowledged expertise in these fields. The training slots offered by the foreign agencies have been largely monopolized by the IB and the R&AW. The utilization of these training slots and the selection of officers for the training should be decided by the NSA---- with one-third of the slots going to Central agencies, one-third to the NSG and one-third to the State Police. It is important to build up a core of terrorism and counter-terrorism expertise in all metro towns.
POINT 11: The IB’s Multi-Disciplinary Centre should have a constantly updated database of all serving and retired officers at the Centre and in the States, who had undergone overseas training, and also of all serving and retired officers and non-governmental figures who have expertise in terrorism and counter-terrorism so that their expertise could be tapped, when needed.
POINT 12: Strengthen the role of the police stations in counter-terrorism in all major cities. Make it clear to all Station House Officers that their record in preventing acts of terrorism, in contributing to the investigation and prosecution of terrorism-related cases and in consequence management after a terrorist strike will be an important factor in assessing their suitability for further promotion. Revive and strengthen the beat system, revive and intensify the local enquiries for suspicious activities in all railway stations, bus termini, airports, hotels, inns and other places and improve police-community relations. An important observation of the UK’s Security and Intelligence Committee of the Prime Minister, which enquired into the London blasts of July,2005, was that no counter-terrorism strategy will succeed unless it is based on the co-operation of the community from which the terrorists have arisen. The UK now has what they call a community-based counter-terrorism strategy. The willingness of different communities to co-operate will largely depend on the relations of the police officers at different levels with the leaders and prominent members of the communities.
POINT 13: Adopt the British practice of having Counter-terrorism Security Advisers in Police Stations. Post them in all urban police stations. Their job will be to constantly train the PS staff in the performance of their counter-terrorism duties, to improve relations with the communities and to closely interact with owners of public places such as hotels, restaurants, shopping malls etc and voluntarily advise them on the security precautions to be taken to prevent terrorist strikes on soft targets and to mitigate the consequences if strikes do take place despite the best efforts of the police to prevent them.
POINT 14: Stop using the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) as a dumping ground for retired officers, who are favoured by the Government. The NSCS cannot be effective in its role of national security management if it is not looked upon with respect by the serving officers. The serving officers look upon the retired officers of the NSCS as living in the past and in a make-believe world of their own totally cut off from the ground realities of today in national security management. The NSCS should be manned only by serving officers of acknowledged capability for thinking and action.
POINT 15: Strengthen the role of the National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) as a Government-sponsored think tank of non-governmental experts in security matters to assist the NSCA and the NSA. Give it specific terms of reference instead of letting it free lance as it often does. It should be discouraged from undertaking esoteric studies.
POINT 16: Set up a separate Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) to deal with internal security. Assessment of intelligence having a bearing on internal security requires different expertise and different analytical tools than assessment of intelligence having a bearing on external security. In 1983, Indira Gandhi, then Prime Minister, bifurcated the JIC and created a separate JIC for internal security. Rajiv Gandhi reversed her decision. Her decision was wise and needs to be revived.
POINT 17: Set up a National Counter-Terrorism Centre (NCTC)under the National Security Adviser (NSA) to ensure joint operational action in all terrorism-related matters. It can be patterned after a similar institution set up in the US under Director, National Intelligence after 9/11. The National Commission set up by the US Congress to enquire into the 9/11 terrorist strikes had expressed the view that better co-ordination among the various agencies will not be enough and that what was required was a joint action command similar to the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Armed Forces. Its tasks should be to monitor intelligence collection by various agencies, avoid duplication of efforts and resources, integrate the intelligence flowing from different agencies and foreign agencies, analyse and assess the integrated intelligence and monitor follow-up action by the Police, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other concerned agencies. Every agency is equally and jointly involved and responsible for the entire counter-terrorism process starting from collection to action on the intelligence collected. If such a system had existed, post-Mumbai complaints such as those of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW) that the advisories issued by them on the possibility of a sea-borne attack by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) on Mumbai were not acted upon by the Mumbai Police would not have arisen because the IB and the R&AW would have been as responsible for follow-up action as the Mumbai Police.
POINT 18: The practice of the privileged direct access to the Prime Minister by the chiefs of the IB and the R&AW, which came into force under Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi, should be vigorously enforced. This privileged direct access is utilised by the intelligence chiefs to bring their concerns over national security and over inaction by the agencies responsible for follow-up on their reports to the personal notice of the Prime Minister and seek his intervention. If the intelligence chiefs had brought to the notice of the Prime Minister the alleged inaction of the Mumbai Police on their reports, he might have intervened and issued the required political directive to the Chief Minister of Maharashtra.
POINT 19: Either create a separate Ministry of Internal Security or strengthen the role of the existing Department of Internal Security in the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and make it responsible for dealing with internal security operationally under the over-all supervision of the Minister for Home Affairs.
POINT 20:Either create a separate federal terrorism investigation agency or empower the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate all cases involving terrorism of a pan-Indian dimension. It need not take up cases where terrorism is confined to a single state or a small region such as terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir or the Al Umma in Tamil Nadu. It should be able to take up the cases for investigation without the need for prior permission from the Governments of the States affected. It should not have any responsibility for investigating crimes other than terrorism. If its charter is expanded to cover other crimes too, there will be political opposition. There is a lot of confusion about this concept of a federal terrorism investigation agency. Many critics ask when the IB is there, what is the need for another central agency. The IB is an intelligence collection agency and not an investigation agency. The IB has no locus standi in the Indian criminal laws. It collects intelligence and not evidence usable in a court of law. It cannot arrest and interrogate a suspect or search premises or perform other tasks of a similar nature, which can be performed only by police officers of the rank of Station House Officers. The IB officers are not recognized as equivalent to SHOs.
POINT 21: Set up a task force consisting of three senior and distinguished Directors-General of Police (DGPs) and ask it to come up with a list of recommendations for strengthening the powers of the police in respect of prevention, investigation and prosecution of terrorism-related offences and the capabilities of the Police in counter-terrorism and implement its recommendations. This is the only way of getting round the present political deadlock over the revival of the Prevention of Terrorism ACT (POTA).
POINT 22: Expedite the erection of the border fence on the border with Bangladesh without worrying about opposition from Bangladesh.
POINT 23: Start a crash programme for the identification of illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and for deporting them. Ban the employment of immigrants from Bangladesh anywhere in Indian territory.
POINT 24: Strict immigration control is an importat part of counter-terrorism The post—9/11 safety of the US is partly due to the tightening up of immigration procedures and their strict enforcement. Among the best practices adopted by the US and emulated by others are: Photographing and finger-printing of all foreigners on arrival, closer questioning of Pakistanis and persons of Pakistani origin etc. We have not yet adopted any of these practices. Hotels and other places of residence should be banned from giving rooms to persons without a departure card and without a valid immigration stamp in their passports. They should be required to take Xerox copies of the first page and the page containing the immigration stamp of the passports of all foreigners and also the departure card stapled to the passport and send them to their local Police Station every morning. All immigration relaxations introduced in the case of Pakistani and Bangladesdhi nationals and persons of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin should be cancelled with immediate effect. The requirement of police reporting by them should be rigorously enforced. It should be made obligatory for all persons hosting Pakistanis and Bangladeshis to report to the local police about their guests. A vigorous drive should be undertaken for tracing all Pakistanis and Bangladeshis overstaying in India after the expiry of their visas and for expelling them.
POINT 25: The MEA’s capability for terrorism-related diplomacy should be strengthened by creating a separate Division for this purpose. It should continuously brief all foreign governments about the role of Pakistan and Bangladesh in supporting terrorism in Indian territory and press for action against them.
POINT 26: The Mumbai strikes have revealed serious gaps in our maritime security on our Western coast. This is partly the result of our over-focus on the Look East policy and the neglect of the Look West dimension. This was corrected earlier this year. Despite this, there are apparently major gaps and an alleged failure by the Naval and Coast Guard authorities to act on the reports of the IB and the R&AW about likely sea –borne threats from the LET. The identification and removal of the gaps need immediate attention. The Mumbai off-shore oil installations and the nuclear and space establishments on the Western coast are also vulnerable to sea-borne terrorist strikes. (1-12-08)
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Karwar has history of shady dockings - Kaiga Could Be Vulnerable
Karwar Dec 1: The Mumbai terror attack has brought to the fore security concerns along coastal Karnataka - it could well be a sitting duck, with the Kaiga nuclear plant and three dams open to strike.
For security agencies, the Karnataka coast, beginning at Talapadi in Dakshina Kannada district up to Karwar in Uttara Kannada, has always been cause for concern. Karwar, which has Asia’s biggest naval base, Kadamba, the Kaiga nuclear plant and three dams and hydel projects, is not monitored constantly. With the exception of the Kadamba naval base, all other sensitive installations are vulnerable because of their proximity to the Arabian Sea.
The Coast Guard, which has its head office in Mangalore a nd is now planning to open a branch in Karwar, is hampered by lack of infrastructure. The story of Karavali Kavalu Pade (KKP), which started with much fanfare a few years ago, is no different. KKP has offices in Karwar and Bhatkal in the district. But staff shortage and the lack of infrastructure has not changed the situation.
People blame successive governments for the plight of KKP. Police officers without the clout to bag coveted posts, are transferred to KKP. The staff have no specialized training to combat terrorists. They are provided with motorboats, but most of the time, these boats are docked because enough funds are not released for petrol, oil and other requirements.
Successive governments have neglected security measures in the coastal area, leaving it vulnerable to arms peddlers. Such activities, which began with the underworld, gradually invited ISI agents. In the early nineties, when the Mumbai police started taking stringent action against smugglers and underworld operatives, they shifted their activities to coastal Karnataka. Karwar, which is very close to Goa, became a favourite of such underworld operatives.
The Jagannath Shetty Commission, which inquired into the Bhatkal communal riots, categorically mentioned that the riots were engineered by forces which smuggled arms into the country via unmanned coasts, such as Karwar, Bhatkal and Udupi, to divert the attention of the security agencies.
Prasanna Kumar, the then assistant commissioner of customs, Karwar, who testified before the Commission, said his department had seized a Pakistani boat with a satellite connection, near Karwar port. But no action was taken in this regard. After a few days, a boat offloaded sophisticated arms and ammunition in the sea at Sadashivgad, near Karwar.
When he (Prasanna Kumar) arrested a few persons in this connection, powerful politicians — who he had named before the Commission - intervened and hushed up the matter. He also said that RDX, which was part of this consignment, was later used in the Mumbai blasts in 1993.
A few months ago, some unidentified persons with automatic rifles were seen in the dense forests near Kaiga. Though people suspect them to be Naxalites or terrorists, the police failed to give a satisfactory explanation.
The Kaiga nuclear project, the Kadra and Nagazari dams on the banks of the river Kali, are susceptible to terrorist attacks from the Arabian Sea. Kaiga is surrounded by forest on the side and the river on the other. The only road which connects the township with Karwar is in a very bad condition.
It is ironical that in any eventuality, security personnel have to be brought from distant places. When there are boat accidents, the Coast Guard fetches helicopters from Goa for rescue operations.
Times News Network
For security agencies, the Karnataka coast, beginning at Talapadi in Dakshina Kannada district up to Karwar in Uttara Kannada, has always been cause for concern. Karwar, which has Asia’s biggest naval base, Kadamba, the Kaiga nuclear plant and three dams and hydel projects, is not monitored constantly. With the exception of the Kadamba naval base, all other sensitive installations are vulnerable because of their proximity to the Arabian Sea.
The Coast Guard, which has its head office in Mangalore a nd is now planning to open a branch in Karwar, is hampered by lack of infrastructure. The story of Karavali Kavalu Pade (KKP), which started with much fanfare a few years ago, is no different. KKP has offices in Karwar and Bhatkal in the district. But staff shortage and the lack of infrastructure has not changed the situation.
People blame successive governments for the plight of KKP. Police officers without the clout to bag coveted posts, are transferred to KKP. The staff have no specialized training to combat terrorists. They are provided with motorboats, but most of the time, these boats are docked because enough funds are not released for petrol, oil and other requirements.
Successive governments have neglected security measures in the coastal area, leaving it vulnerable to arms peddlers. Such activities, which began with the underworld, gradually invited ISI agents. In the early nineties, when the Mumbai police started taking stringent action against smugglers and underworld operatives, they shifted their activities to coastal Karnataka. Karwar, which is very close to Goa, became a favourite of such underworld operatives.
The Jagannath Shetty Commission, which inquired into the Bhatkal communal riots, categorically mentioned that the riots were engineered by forces which smuggled arms into the country via unmanned coasts, such as Karwar, Bhatkal and Udupi, to divert the attention of the security agencies.
Prasanna Kumar, the then assistant commissioner of customs, Karwar, who testified before the Commission, said his department had seized a Pakistani boat with a satellite connection, near Karwar port. But no action was taken in this regard. After a few days, a boat offloaded sophisticated arms and ammunition in the sea at Sadashivgad, near Karwar.
When he (Prasanna Kumar) arrested a few persons in this connection, powerful politicians — who he had named before the Commission - intervened and hushed up the matter. He also said that RDX, which was part of this consignment, was later used in the Mumbai blasts in 1993.
A few months ago, some unidentified persons with automatic rifles were seen in the dense forests near Kaiga. Though people suspect them to be Naxalites or terrorists, the police failed to give a satisfactory explanation.
The Kaiga nuclear project, the Kadra and Nagazari dams on the banks of the river Kali, are susceptible to terrorist attacks from the Arabian Sea. Kaiga is surrounded by forest on the side and the river on the other. The only road which connects the township with Karwar is in a very bad condition.
It is ironical that in any eventuality, security personnel have to be brought from distant places. When there are boat accidents, the Coast Guard fetches helicopters from Goa for rescue operations.
Times News Network
Shivraj's tenure of internal insecurity
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/mumbai-carnage-prosecute-the-inefficient/392648/
Font Size Amitabh Sinha
Posted: Dec 01, 2008 at 0920 hrs IST
New Delhi:: As Home Minister, Shivraj Patil presided over one of the bloodiest periods in India’s recent history. The four and half years of his tenure were laced with about 20 major terrorist strikes, hundreds of deaths of innocent civilians in internal violence, and an alarming increase in the spread of Naxal activities, to mention just a few elements of internal security.
To be fair to Patil, he never got much of assistance from any of the state governments, which are directly responsible for the maintenance of law and order and also for collecting intelligence information at the grassroots level. The states were quite happy to see the responsibility and the blame being fixed on Patil.
But his own statements and actions never instilled any confidence among the people who were at the receiving end of an endless cycle of violence and mindless Terror attacks.
There have been eight major incidents of terrorist strikes in this year alone — including the latest attacks in Mumbai — in which more than 400 people have lost their lives. But all that came out in response from the Home Ministry was some inane statements that, to the hapless victims, sounded hollow, repetitive and impotent, even comic.
Buy TShirts for Rs 99/-
Large selection of cool designs.
www.myntra.com/99-corner/Dell™ Studio 15 Laptop
With 3GB RAM, 320GB HDD @ Rs 49,900
www.dell.comNeed a Home Loan?
Compare Home Loans of Major Banks
Apnaloan.comAds By GoogleEven as recently as last weekend, Patil did not forget to mention that the incidents and casualties in the past four years was much less than those that occurred in the previous four and half years. “Yet, the impression created is that terrorism has increased and not reduced,” he said at the annual conference of police chiefs.
“Even if one incident occurs or one person becomes a casualty, it should cause us concern and should make us alert. However, it should not demoralise us and give wrong information to the uninformed section of the society,” he said.
True, there were a few meetings during which issues like modernisation of police forces and improving the intelligence network was discussed. True states were repeatedly being urged to fill up the burgeoning vacancies in their police forces, to increase their spending on modernising the forces and buy equipment, and to encourage coordination of efforts by various policing agencies.
But these were not able to stop the almost predictable cycle of terror attacks. Instead, his penchant for referring to terrorists and Naxalites as ‘misguided brothers’, his ill-advised equation between Mohammad Afzal and Sarabjeet Singh, his adamant opposition to the promulgation of a tough anti-terror law and denying the same to the state governments, all contributed to the perception that Patil was soft on terror. He came to symbolise everything that was wrong with India’s internal security mechanism.
Font Size Amitabh Sinha
Posted: Dec 01, 2008 at 0920 hrs IST
New Delhi:: As Home Minister, Shivraj Patil presided over one of the bloodiest periods in India’s recent history. The four and half years of his tenure were laced with about 20 major terrorist strikes, hundreds of deaths of innocent civilians in internal violence, and an alarming increase in the spread of Naxal activities, to mention just a few elements of internal security.
To be fair to Patil, he never got much of assistance from any of the state governments, which are directly responsible for the maintenance of law and order and also for collecting intelligence information at the grassroots level. The states were quite happy to see the responsibility and the blame being fixed on Patil.
But his own statements and actions never instilled any confidence among the people who were at the receiving end of an endless cycle of violence and mindless Terror attacks.
There have been eight major incidents of terrorist strikes in this year alone — including the latest attacks in Mumbai — in which more than 400 people have lost their lives. But all that came out in response from the Home Ministry was some inane statements that, to the hapless victims, sounded hollow, repetitive and impotent, even comic.
Buy TShirts for Rs 99/-
Large selection of cool designs.
www.myntra.com/99-corner/Dell™ Studio 15 Laptop
With 3GB RAM, 320GB HDD @ Rs 49,900
www.dell.comNeed a Home Loan?
Compare Home Loans of Major Banks
Apnaloan.comAds By GoogleEven as recently as last weekend, Patil did not forget to mention that the incidents and casualties in the past four years was much less than those that occurred in the previous four and half years. “Yet, the impression created is that terrorism has increased and not reduced,” he said at the annual conference of police chiefs.
“Even if one incident occurs or one person becomes a casualty, it should cause us concern and should make us alert. However, it should not demoralise us and give wrong information to the uninformed section of the society,” he said.
True, there were a few meetings during which issues like modernisation of police forces and improving the intelligence network was discussed. True states were repeatedly being urged to fill up the burgeoning vacancies in their police forces, to increase their spending on modernising the forces and buy equipment, and to encourage coordination of efforts by various policing agencies.
But these were not able to stop the almost predictable cycle of terror attacks. Instead, his penchant for referring to terrorists and Naxalites as ‘misguided brothers’, his ill-advised equation between Mohammad Afzal and Sarabjeet Singh, his adamant opposition to the promulgation of a tough anti-terror law and denying the same to the state governments, all contributed to the perception that Patil was soft on terror. He came to symbolise everything that was wrong with India’s internal security mechanism.
November 30, 2008
QUOTE OF THE DAY : Govt not given protective gear tailor-made for Karkare
"I watched with shock and disbelief on the TV, visuals of Karkare trying different helmets and bullet-proof vests before choosing one which suited his build. Here was the most threatened officer of the Mumbai Police and the Government had not even given him a protective gear tailor-made for him. This is a telling instance of the casual way we handle counter-terrorism and we look after our brave officers fighting terrorism." -- B.Raman
MUMBAI: LESSONS FOR THE FUTURE
By B.Raman
While the picture of what happened in Mumbai between 9-21 PM on Wednesday and 8 AM on Saturday, when the terrorist situation was finally terminated, is still incomplete and confusing, certain facts available should give an attitude of the magnitude of the strikes, the like of which the world has not seen before:
There were 13 incidents of intense firing with assault rifles at different places, including the Chhatrapati Shivaji Train (CST) terminus, where the terrorist operation started at 9-21 PM, the Metro Cinema junction, the Cama and Albless Hospital, outside the Olympia restaurant in Colaba, the lobbies of the Taj Mahal and Oberoi/Trident hotels, and the Leopald Café behind the Taj Mahal Hotel. The terrorists would seem to have chosen the CST for the launching of their strikes because it is named after Shivaji, a Hindu ruler, who fiercely opposed the Muslim rulers of India. Near the Metro Cinema junction, some terrorists hijacked a police vehicle and went around spraying bullets on passers-by.
There were seven incidents involving explosive devices----outside the Taj Mahal Hotel, in the BPT Colony at Mazgaon, three near the Oberoi/Trident Hotels, the Colaba market and inside a taxi.
There were many incidents of throwing hand-grenades---two of them at the Cama hospital and on Free Press Road. Hemant Karkare, the legendary head of Mumbai’s Anti-terrorism Squad (ATS), is reported to have been killed in the incident near the hospital.
There were three incidents of fidayeen style (suicidal, not suicide) infiltration into buildings followed by a prolonged confrontation with the security forces before being killed or captured. These took place in the Taj Mahal and the Oberoi/Trident hotels and in the Narriman House in Colaba, where a Jewish religious-cum-cultural centre is located, headed by a Jewish Rabbi. Jewish people of different nationalities often congregate there. The centre also has cheap accommodation for Jewish visitors from abroad.
According to the local authorities, most of the hotel guests who were subsequently rescued by the NSG had run into their rooms and locked themselves up when the terrorist forced their way into the lobbies and restaurants and started opening fire. They were not hostages. It is not yet clear whether the terrorists did manage to take hostages and, if so, of which nationalities.
The terrorists took four Jewish people hostages in the Narriman House, three of them Israeli nationals. They were found dead when the NSG made their entry and killed the terrorists. It is not yet known how they died-----through bullet wounds or beheading as the jihadis normally do.
There were over 160 fatalities. The number may go up as the security forces inspect the hotels. According to present indications, the number of foreigners killed was about 10 only--- including three Israelis, two Greeks, one Japanese and possibly two Americans (not yet confirmed ). The terrorists were reportedly looking for people with American, British and Israeli passports.
Almost all the terrorist strikes took place against targets near the sea, indicating thereby that the terrorists, who had reportedly come by sea, were hoping to escape by sea if they managed to survive.
Between 15 and 20 terrorists, who came from outside, are believed to have participated in the operation, The kind of local support they had is not yet clear.
Two of the terrorists are reported to have been caught alive and are presently under interrogation. According to the police, one of them, who gave his name as Ajmal Amir Kamal, is a resident of Faridot, near Multan, in Pakistani Punjab. He identified himself as a member of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET). His preliminary interrogation also indicates that the others, who came from outside, also belonged to the LET and had been trained at Muridke, in Pakistani Punjab, where the headquarters of the LET are located.
2. The Mumbai Police, the NSG, the Army, the Navy, the Air Force and the Mumbai Fire Brigade have confronted the terrorists and handled the crisis in an exemplary manner, of which the entire nation can be proud. Their performance has been as exemplary as the crisis management of their counterparts in New York after 9/11. About 20 officers of various ranks, including the chief of the ATS, an additional Commissioner of Police of Mumbai, and two young and intrepid officers of the NSG have died fighting the terrorists.
3.The Government of Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh and his Congress (I) are back to their denial and cover-up mode. They play down the possibility of the involvement of Al Qaeda despite tell-tale signs of an Al Qaeda stamp on the strikes. They continue to maintain a silence on the role of sections of the Indian Muslims lest any open projection of this cost them Muslim votes. They continue to highlight the role of the LET, but without highlighting the fact that it is a member of Osama bin Laden’s International Islamic Front (IIF) and that it has many associates in the Indian Muslim community.
4.I watched with shock and disbelief on the TV, visuals of Karkare trying different helmets and bullet-proof vests before choosing one which suited his build. Here was the most threatened officer of the Mumbai Police and the Government had not even given him a protective gear tailor-made for him. This is a telling instance of the casual way we handle counter-terrorism and we look after our brave officers fighting terrorism.
5.The Prime Minister has been unwise in reportedly suggesting a visit to India by Lt.Gen.Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the Director-General of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), for discussions on the Mumbai blasts. One fails to understand what useful results will come out of it. There are strong indications of the involvement of the LET in the Mumbai strikes----either on its own or at the direction of bin Laden and most likely with the logistic support of some Indian Muslims. By failing to act against the LET, its leaders and terrorist infrastructure even after ostensibly banning it on January 12,2002, the State of Pakistan has definitely facilitated its acts of terrorism in Indian territory. By sharing the information collected by us at this stage with the ISI chief we will help him in covering up the tracks of the LET and the ISI before we could complete the investigation. There has been opposition in Pakistan to his visit particularly from the Army.
6.One should not be surprised if the suggestion for the visit had come from the US and the Prime Minister had accepted it just as he accepted in September,2006, the US suggestion for setting up a joint counter-terrorism mechanism with Pakistan. The American ploy would have been to divert any Indian public anger against Pakistan and the Prime Minister should have firmly rejected it.
7.Three of the most gruesome acts of terrorism since India became independent have taken place in Mumbai---the March 1993 blasts, the July 2006 blasts in suburban trains and the strikes of November 26-29. It is a shame that we have not been able to protect effectively this city, which is the jewel of India. Mumbai is India’s New York and Shanghai. Look at the way the Americans have protected NY after 9/11. Look at the way the Chinese have protected Shanghai. The immediate priority of the Government should be to set up a joint task force of serving and retired officers from Maharashtra in the Police, intelligence agencies and the Armed Forces to work-out and implement a time-bound plan to ensure that 26/11 cannot be repeated again. Mumbai has till now been the gateway of India. The terrorists have exploited it. We should make it Fortress India. Foreign investors will lose confidence in India if Mumbai, where most of the corporate headquarters are located, can be attacked repeatedly with impunity by terrorists.
8.The second lesson is that confidence-building measures with Pakistan cannot be at the expense of national security. In the name of confidence-building, there have been too many relaxations of immigration regulations applicable to Pakistan. There has been pressure on the Government for more relaxations from the so-called Indians-Pakistanis Bhai Bhai (Indians-Pakistanis are brothers) lobby. The terrorists have been a major beneficiary of these relaxations. These relaxations have decreased the vigilance of our people. For example, hotels, which immediately used to alert the Police when a Pakistani national or a foreigner of Pakistani origin checked in, no longer do so. According to one as yet unconfirmed report, some of the perpetrators of the attacks on the hotels had checked in some days before the strike and the others came subsequently by boat. If this was so and if the hotels had immediately alerted the Police, the terrorist strikes might have been prevented.
9. In my view, the terrorist strikes in Mumbai had the stamp of Al Qaeda in the way they were conceived, planned and executed. There has also been a touch of the Hizbollah of the Lebanon, the Popular Front For The Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the Al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade and other Palestinian organizations.
10.The reported use of boats and dinghies for the clandestine transport of men and material for terrorist strikes on land is an old modus operandi (MO) used in the past against Israel. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) had copied it from them. The anti-India jihadis have emulated their West Asian counterparts.
11.The use of boats for transport enables the terrorists to evade physical security checks by road, rail and air. The numerous creeks between India and Pakistan across the Bhuj area of Gujarat enable the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan and the pro-Al Qaeda Pakistani terrorist organizations to clandestinely transport men and material by sea. Reports that the ISI had planned to use this MO for helping the Khalistani terrorists in the 1990s had led to the Border Security Force acquiring some boats which could be used for surveillance in these creeks.
12.The success of the terrorists in evading detection by our Coast Guard and the police reveals a serious gap in our maritime counter-terrorism architecture. If this gap is not quickly identified and closed, the vulnerability of the Bombay High off-shore oil installations and the nuclear establishments to terrorist attacks from the sea would be increased. Many of our nuclear and space establishments----not only in Mumbai, but also in other areas---are located on the coast and are particularly vulnerable to sea-borne terrorist attacks.
13.The stamp of Al Qaeda is evident in the selection of targets. The Taj Hotel, old and new, the Oberoi-Trident Hotel and the Narriman House were the strategic focus of the terrorist operation. The terrorist strikes in other places such as railway stations, a hospital etc and instances of random firing were of a tactical nature intended to create scare and panic.
14. The strategic significance of the attacks on the two hotels from Al Qaeda’s point of view arose from the fact that these hotels are the approved hotels of the US and Israeli Governments for their visiting public servants and for the temporary stay of their consular officials posted in Mumbai till a regular house is found for them.
15. Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, presently undergoing trial before a military tribunal in the Guantanamo Bay detention centre for his involvement in the 9/11 terrorist strikes, was reported to have told his American interrogators that before 9/11 Al Qaeda had planned to blow up the Israeli Embassy in New Delhi. After the visit of President George Bush to India in March,2006, Osama bin Laden had, in an audio message, described the global jihad as directed against the Crusaders, the Jewish people and the Hindus.
16.Al Qaeda and pro-Al Qaeda organizations have been critical of India’s close co-operation with Israel and the US. In the past, the ISI had also shown an interest in having Indo-Israeli relations disrupted through terrorist attacks on visiting Israeli nationals in India. In 1991, it had instigated an attack by the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front on some Israeli tourists in Srinagar by alleging that they were really Israeli counter-terrorism experts.
17.The fact that the number of foreigners killed was small would show that the attacks on the foreigners in the hotels was selective and not indiscriminate. Available reports indicate that the terrorists were looking for American, British and Israeli nationals----particularly visiting public servants among them with official or diplomatic passports.
18.The only reason for their targeting the British could have been the active British role in the anti-Taliban operations in Afghanistan and in training the commandoes of Pakistan’s Special Services Group (SSG), jointly with an American team of instructors. The SSG was in the forefront of the raid into the Lal Masjid of Islamabad in July,2007, and has been playing an active role in the operations against the Pakistani Taliban in the Swat Valley of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).
19. The terrorist strike has also had an anti-Jewish angle as evident from the raid into the Narriman House and the taking of Jewish hostages there. The targeting of the Americans, British, Israelis and Indian Jews has to be seen in the overall context of not only the anger of some Muslims against the Indian co-operation with the US and Israel , but also the role of the US and the UK in the war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. One should be prepared for more attacks in future not only on American, British and Israeli nationals, but also on their diplomatic and consular missions and their business interests in India.
20. The attacks on the foreigners have already disrupted the ongoing tour of India by the English cricket team. it is ironic that at a time when we were considering the advisability of our cricket team going to Pakistan due to the poor security conditions there, foreign cricket teams should start having fears about coming to India due to the poor internal security in India. Similar nervousness in the minds of businessmen in foreign countries over security conditions in India could be an outcome of the spectacular terrorist strikes.
21.In the US, Spain and the UK, the terrorist strikes attributed to Al Qaeda were followed by detailed enquiries to identify deficiencies which made the strikes possible and recommend remedial measures, which were implemented. In India, even though we have been facing a series of major terrorist strikes since November 2007, no enquiry has been held. Unless we have the courage to admit our deficiencies and correct them, our counter-terrorism machinery is unlikely to improve. The public has a right to be kept informed of the results of the enquiries and the action taken.
22.There is a misleading debate started by the Congress (I) on the importance of patriotism in the face of the terrorist strikes. It has been trying to silence criticism of its mishandling in the name of patriotism. It has been citing the example of the US after 9/11. In the US, patriotism did not mean support of the Government, right or wrong. It meant support for all the measures taken by the Government for strengthening the counter-terrorism machinery such as additional powers for the agencies and the police, increase in budgetary allocations for the agencies, tightening of immigration procedures etc. It did not mean silence on the sins of commission and omission of the Government. Electoral calculations seem to be the only motivating factor of the Government’s actions and not national interests and national security----even after the colossal Mumbai failure and the consequent tragedy.
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
While the picture of what happened in Mumbai between 9-21 PM on Wednesday and 8 AM on Saturday, when the terrorist situation was finally terminated, is still incomplete and confusing, certain facts available should give an attitude of the magnitude of the strikes, the like of which the world has not seen before:
There were 13 incidents of intense firing with assault rifles at different places, including the Chhatrapati Shivaji Train (CST) terminus, where the terrorist operation started at 9-21 PM, the Metro Cinema junction, the Cama and Albless Hospital, outside the Olympia restaurant in Colaba, the lobbies of the Taj Mahal and Oberoi/Trident hotels, and the Leopald Café behind the Taj Mahal Hotel. The terrorists would seem to have chosen the CST for the launching of their strikes because it is named after Shivaji, a Hindu ruler, who fiercely opposed the Muslim rulers of India. Near the Metro Cinema junction, some terrorists hijacked a police vehicle and went around spraying bullets on passers-by.
There were seven incidents involving explosive devices----outside the Taj Mahal Hotel, in the BPT Colony at Mazgaon, three near the Oberoi/Trident Hotels, the Colaba market and inside a taxi.
There were many incidents of throwing hand-grenades---two of them at the Cama hospital and on Free Press Road. Hemant Karkare, the legendary head of Mumbai’s Anti-terrorism Squad (ATS), is reported to have been killed in the incident near the hospital.
There were three incidents of fidayeen style (suicidal, not suicide) infiltration into buildings followed by a prolonged confrontation with the security forces before being killed or captured. These took place in the Taj Mahal and the Oberoi/Trident hotels and in the Narriman House in Colaba, where a Jewish religious-cum-cultural centre is located, headed by a Jewish Rabbi. Jewish people of different nationalities often congregate there. The centre also has cheap accommodation for Jewish visitors from abroad.
According to the local authorities, most of the hotel guests who were subsequently rescued by the NSG had run into their rooms and locked themselves up when the terrorist forced their way into the lobbies and restaurants and started opening fire. They were not hostages. It is not yet clear whether the terrorists did manage to take hostages and, if so, of which nationalities.
The terrorists took four Jewish people hostages in the Narriman House, three of them Israeli nationals. They were found dead when the NSG made their entry and killed the terrorists. It is not yet known how they died-----through bullet wounds or beheading as the jihadis normally do.
There were over 160 fatalities. The number may go up as the security forces inspect the hotels. According to present indications, the number of foreigners killed was about 10 only--- including three Israelis, two Greeks, one Japanese and possibly two Americans (not yet confirmed ). The terrorists were reportedly looking for people with American, British and Israeli passports.
Almost all the terrorist strikes took place against targets near the sea, indicating thereby that the terrorists, who had reportedly come by sea, were hoping to escape by sea if they managed to survive.
Between 15 and 20 terrorists, who came from outside, are believed to have participated in the operation, The kind of local support they had is not yet clear.
Two of the terrorists are reported to have been caught alive and are presently under interrogation. According to the police, one of them, who gave his name as Ajmal Amir Kamal, is a resident of Faridot, near Multan, in Pakistani Punjab. He identified himself as a member of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET). His preliminary interrogation also indicates that the others, who came from outside, also belonged to the LET and had been trained at Muridke, in Pakistani Punjab, where the headquarters of the LET are located.
2. The Mumbai Police, the NSG, the Army, the Navy, the Air Force and the Mumbai Fire Brigade have confronted the terrorists and handled the crisis in an exemplary manner, of which the entire nation can be proud. Their performance has been as exemplary as the crisis management of their counterparts in New York after 9/11. About 20 officers of various ranks, including the chief of the ATS, an additional Commissioner of Police of Mumbai, and two young and intrepid officers of the NSG have died fighting the terrorists.
3.The Government of Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh and his Congress (I) are back to their denial and cover-up mode. They play down the possibility of the involvement of Al Qaeda despite tell-tale signs of an Al Qaeda stamp on the strikes. They continue to maintain a silence on the role of sections of the Indian Muslims lest any open projection of this cost them Muslim votes. They continue to highlight the role of the LET, but without highlighting the fact that it is a member of Osama bin Laden’s International Islamic Front (IIF) and that it has many associates in the Indian Muslim community.
4.I watched with shock and disbelief on the TV, visuals of Karkare trying different helmets and bullet-proof vests before choosing one which suited his build. Here was the most threatened officer of the Mumbai Police and the Government had not even given him a protective gear tailor-made for him. This is a telling instance of the casual way we handle counter-terrorism and we look after our brave officers fighting terrorism.
5.The Prime Minister has been unwise in reportedly suggesting a visit to India by Lt.Gen.Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the Director-General of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), for discussions on the Mumbai blasts. One fails to understand what useful results will come out of it. There are strong indications of the involvement of the LET in the Mumbai strikes----either on its own or at the direction of bin Laden and most likely with the logistic support of some Indian Muslims. By failing to act against the LET, its leaders and terrorist infrastructure even after ostensibly banning it on January 12,2002, the State of Pakistan has definitely facilitated its acts of terrorism in Indian territory. By sharing the information collected by us at this stage with the ISI chief we will help him in covering up the tracks of the LET and the ISI before we could complete the investigation. There has been opposition in Pakistan to his visit particularly from the Army.
6.One should not be surprised if the suggestion for the visit had come from the US and the Prime Minister had accepted it just as he accepted in September,2006, the US suggestion for setting up a joint counter-terrorism mechanism with Pakistan. The American ploy would have been to divert any Indian public anger against Pakistan and the Prime Minister should have firmly rejected it.
7.Three of the most gruesome acts of terrorism since India became independent have taken place in Mumbai---the March 1993 blasts, the July 2006 blasts in suburban trains and the strikes of November 26-29. It is a shame that we have not been able to protect effectively this city, which is the jewel of India. Mumbai is India’s New York and Shanghai. Look at the way the Americans have protected NY after 9/11. Look at the way the Chinese have protected Shanghai. The immediate priority of the Government should be to set up a joint task force of serving and retired officers from Maharashtra in the Police, intelligence agencies and the Armed Forces to work-out and implement a time-bound plan to ensure that 26/11 cannot be repeated again. Mumbai has till now been the gateway of India. The terrorists have exploited it. We should make it Fortress India. Foreign investors will lose confidence in India if Mumbai, where most of the corporate headquarters are located, can be attacked repeatedly with impunity by terrorists.
8.The second lesson is that confidence-building measures with Pakistan cannot be at the expense of national security. In the name of confidence-building, there have been too many relaxations of immigration regulations applicable to Pakistan. There has been pressure on the Government for more relaxations from the so-called Indians-Pakistanis Bhai Bhai (Indians-Pakistanis are brothers) lobby. The terrorists have been a major beneficiary of these relaxations. These relaxations have decreased the vigilance of our people. For example, hotels, which immediately used to alert the Police when a Pakistani national or a foreigner of Pakistani origin checked in, no longer do so. According to one as yet unconfirmed report, some of the perpetrators of the attacks on the hotels had checked in some days before the strike and the others came subsequently by boat. If this was so and if the hotels had immediately alerted the Police, the terrorist strikes might have been prevented.
9. In my view, the terrorist strikes in Mumbai had the stamp of Al Qaeda in the way they were conceived, planned and executed. There has also been a touch of the Hizbollah of the Lebanon, the Popular Front For The Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the Al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade and other Palestinian organizations.
10.The reported use of boats and dinghies for the clandestine transport of men and material for terrorist strikes on land is an old modus operandi (MO) used in the past against Israel. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) had copied it from them. The anti-India jihadis have emulated their West Asian counterparts.
11.The use of boats for transport enables the terrorists to evade physical security checks by road, rail and air. The numerous creeks between India and Pakistan across the Bhuj area of Gujarat enable the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan and the pro-Al Qaeda Pakistani terrorist organizations to clandestinely transport men and material by sea. Reports that the ISI had planned to use this MO for helping the Khalistani terrorists in the 1990s had led to the Border Security Force acquiring some boats which could be used for surveillance in these creeks.
12.The success of the terrorists in evading detection by our Coast Guard and the police reveals a serious gap in our maritime counter-terrorism architecture. If this gap is not quickly identified and closed, the vulnerability of the Bombay High off-shore oil installations and the nuclear establishments to terrorist attacks from the sea would be increased. Many of our nuclear and space establishments----not only in Mumbai, but also in other areas---are located on the coast and are particularly vulnerable to sea-borne terrorist attacks.
13.The stamp of Al Qaeda is evident in the selection of targets. The Taj Hotel, old and new, the Oberoi-Trident Hotel and the Narriman House were the strategic focus of the terrorist operation. The terrorist strikes in other places such as railway stations, a hospital etc and instances of random firing were of a tactical nature intended to create scare and panic.
14. The strategic significance of the attacks on the two hotels from Al Qaeda’s point of view arose from the fact that these hotels are the approved hotels of the US and Israeli Governments for their visiting public servants and for the temporary stay of their consular officials posted in Mumbai till a regular house is found for them.
15. Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, presently undergoing trial before a military tribunal in the Guantanamo Bay detention centre for his involvement in the 9/11 terrorist strikes, was reported to have told his American interrogators that before 9/11 Al Qaeda had planned to blow up the Israeli Embassy in New Delhi. After the visit of President George Bush to India in March,2006, Osama bin Laden had, in an audio message, described the global jihad as directed against the Crusaders, the Jewish people and the Hindus.
16.Al Qaeda and pro-Al Qaeda organizations have been critical of India’s close co-operation with Israel and the US. In the past, the ISI had also shown an interest in having Indo-Israeli relations disrupted through terrorist attacks on visiting Israeli nationals in India. In 1991, it had instigated an attack by the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front on some Israeli tourists in Srinagar by alleging that they were really Israeli counter-terrorism experts.
17.The fact that the number of foreigners killed was small would show that the attacks on the foreigners in the hotels was selective and not indiscriminate. Available reports indicate that the terrorists were looking for American, British and Israeli nationals----particularly visiting public servants among them with official or diplomatic passports.
18.The only reason for their targeting the British could have been the active British role in the anti-Taliban operations in Afghanistan and in training the commandoes of Pakistan’s Special Services Group (SSG), jointly with an American team of instructors. The SSG was in the forefront of the raid into the Lal Masjid of Islamabad in July,2007, and has been playing an active role in the operations against the Pakistani Taliban in the Swat Valley of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).
19. The terrorist strike has also had an anti-Jewish angle as evident from the raid into the Narriman House and the taking of Jewish hostages there. The targeting of the Americans, British, Israelis and Indian Jews has to be seen in the overall context of not only the anger of some Muslims against the Indian co-operation with the US and Israel , but also the role of the US and the UK in the war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. One should be prepared for more attacks in future not only on American, British and Israeli nationals, but also on their diplomatic and consular missions and their business interests in India.
20. The attacks on the foreigners have already disrupted the ongoing tour of India by the English cricket team. it is ironic that at a time when we were considering the advisability of our cricket team going to Pakistan due to the poor security conditions there, foreign cricket teams should start having fears about coming to India due to the poor internal security in India. Similar nervousness in the minds of businessmen in foreign countries over security conditions in India could be an outcome of the spectacular terrorist strikes.
21.In the US, Spain and the UK, the terrorist strikes attributed to Al Qaeda were followed by detailed enquiries to identify deficiencies which made the strikes possible and recommend remedial measures, which were implemented. In India, even though we have been facing a series of major terrorist strikes since November 2007, no enquiry has been held. Unless we have the courage to admit our deficiencies and correct them, our counter-terrorism machinery is unlikely to improve. The public has a right to be kept informed of the results of the enquiries and the action taken.
22.There is a misleading debate started by the Congress (I) on the importance of patriotism in the face of the terrorist strikes. It has been trying to silence criticism of its mishandling in the name of patriotism. It has been citing the example of the US after 9/11. In the US, patriotism did not mean support of the Government, right or wrong. It meant support for all the measures taken by the Government for strengthening the counter-terrorism machinery such as additional powers for the agencies and the police, increase in budgetary allocations for the agencies, tightening of immigration procedures etc. It did not mean silence on the sins of commission and omission of the Government. Electoral calculations seem to be the only motivating factor of the Government’s actions and not national interests and national security----even after the colossal Mumbai failure and the consequent tragedy.
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Mumbai attack : Tactical Innovation
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2008/11/journal-more-on.html
It's clear from the Mumbai attack that terrorist organizations are inexorably moving closer to the global guerrilla model of warfare (it was an evolutionary improvement over the example the PCC set in the 2006 Sao Paulo attacks). Extremely small teams, operating autonomously, that rapidly move to attack a flexible set of objectives to achieve a leveraged and synergistic effect. Generic improvements (that can apply to a variety of motives) in technique that we can expect to see in the near future include:
Better use of infrastructure disruption. While panicked crowds and other forms of localized disruption of transportation hubs are effective, a strategic approach to disruption that includes strikes on communications, transportation and energy hubs would prolong the impact and slow the government response. The key point here is that attacks on strategic systempunkts can impact tactical environments at a distance (akin to the Parthian shot that distracts and depletes an enemy).
A focus on corporations and commercial elites. Less heavily protected than government targets and more important to the economic viability of the city. Easily "taxed" through assault in order to force a shift in operations and departures. This will run in parallel, but not replace, a bevy of attacks on foreign businesspeople (which heightens media response but has less long term impact on the city's viability).
Fear management. The combination of rapid movement and indiscriminate slaughter of civilians did achieve a high level of panic. However, in order to create panic induced casualties and prolong the psychological impact, there will be an increasing focus on channeling crowds along "fear vectors."
Media spamming to co-opt information flows. At a minimum, several Web sites and mass e-mailings that launch in parallel to the attack. It could also include multi-channel radio/TV transmissions. In either case, rather than claims of responsibility or justification (a legacy approach), the content of the messaging will be seemingly real-time information on the attack configured to maximize fear/panic, disinformation, and confusion.
The late November commando attack on Mumbai India is a great demonstration of the state of the art in "urban takedowns." Essentially, an urban takedown is an attempt by a small group of attackers to overwhelm a city and force it into a prolonged shutdown (see the site, Naxalite Rage for an excellent exploration of the incident). The attack consisted of:
A nautical assault (coup de main). Several boats. laden with explosives and commandos armed to the teeth, gained entry to the city via the port. This allowed maximal entry velocity into the city's center. However, a rapid response by the Indian naval units in the area closed off the water as an escape route.
Swarm of the city using autonomous "buddy pairs." Each pair had their own routes, minimizing the potential for fratricide. While the initial dispersion of the group was concentrated, the deployment was the opposite (this is an inversion of the formula for animal pack hunters and U-boat swarming). The pair teams shot/blew up targets en route to maximize confusion/fear.Use of the city's infrastructure for movement and coordination. The city's transportation infrastructure was leveraged, travel by roads and the acquisition of vehicles. Cell phone communication for coordination (not confirmed yet)?
Hostage drama at international hotels. Some of the buddy pairs were able to assault international hotels, which allowed them to focus on killing foreigners. These assaults became prolonged hostage dramas when the government's forces arrived.
It's clear from the Mumbai attack that terrorist organizations are inexorably moving closer to the global guerrilla model of warfare (it was an evolutionary improvement over the example the PCC set in the 2006 Sao Paulo attacks). Extremely small teams, operating autonomously, that rapidly move to attack a flexible set of objectives to achieve a leveraged and synergistic effect. Generic improvements (that can apply to a variety of motives) in technique that we can expect to see in the near future include:
Better use of infrastructure disruption. While panicked crowds and other forms of localized disruption of transportation hubs are effective, a strategic approach to disruption that includes strikes on communications, transportation and energy hubs would prolong the impact and slow the government response. The key point here is that attacks on strategic systempunkts can impact tactical environments at a distance (akin to the Parthian shot that distracts and depletes an enemy).
A focus on corporations and commercial elites. Less heavily protected than government targets and more important to the economic viability of the city. Easily "taxed" through assault in order to force a shift in operations and departures. This will run in parallel, but not replace, a bevy of attacks on foreign businesspeople (which heightens media response but has less long term impact on the city's viability).
Fear management. The combination of rapid movement and indiscriminate slaughter of civilians did achieve a high level of panic. However, in order to create panic induced casualties and prolong the psychological impact, there will be an increasing focus on channeling crowds along "fear vectors."
Media spamming to co-opt information flows. At a minimum, several Web sites and mass e-mailings that launch in parallel to the attack. It could also include multi-channel radio/TV transmissions. In either case, rather than claims of responsibility or justification (a legacy approach), the content of the messaging will be seemingly real-time information on the attack configured to maximize fear/panic, disinformation, and confusion.
The late November commando attack on Mumbai India is a great demonstration of the state of the art in "urban takedowns." Essentially, an urban takedown is an attempt by a small group of attackers to overwhelm a city and force it into a prolonged shutdown (see the site, Naxalite Rage for an excellent exploration of the incident). The attack consisted of:
A nautical assault (coup de main). Several boats. laden with explosives and commandos armed to the teeth, gained entry to the city via the port. This allowed maximal entry velocity into the city's center. However, a rapid response by the Indian naval units in the area closed off the water as an escape route.
Swarm of the city using autonomous "buddy pairs." Each pair had their own routes, minimizing the potential for fratricide. While the initial dispersion of the group was concentrated, the deployment was the opposite (this is an inversion of the formula for animal pack hunters and U-boat swarming). The pair teams shot/blew up targets en route to maximize confusion/fear.Use of the city's infrastructure for movement and coordination. The city's transportation infrastructure was leveraged, travel by roads and the acquisition of vehicles. Cell phone communication for coordination (not confirmed yet)?
Hostage drama at international hotels. Some of the buddy pairs were able to assault international hotels, which allowed them to focus on killing foreigners. These assaults became prolonged hostage dramas when the government's forces arrived.
Mumbai Terror Strikes: Terror's own Special Boat Service
Divya Kumar Soti
Terror strikes in Mumbai were something more than mere terror attacks. This was what terror groups were never capable of doing in past i.e. launching surgical strikes in style of Special Forces. Many may find it an over statement. But tactics employed in planning, launching these strikes and during close combat with MARCOS and NSG clearly underlines this new challenge. The whole analysis of Mumbai terror strikes point out towards this new acquisition of Terror groups in south Asia.
To clear any doubts lets revise the events. According to different reports, terrorists after being launched from Karachi hijacked a fishing boat from Porbandar then traveled towards Mumbai Coast and then again changed to small boats of the kind generally used by Special Forces to infiltrate through coastlines. According to media reports, quoting eye witnesses, terrorists grouped into teams of two each entered into Mumbai through Macchimar colony and Sasan dock and within few hours of there entering into Mumbai they started the shoot outs. They attacked almost all vital installations in South Mumbai within few tens of minutes and as it is now becoming clear two of the terrorists may have deliberately ambushed the Police vehicle carrying top ATS brass. Then they were able to carry out massacres at CST, Oberoi and TAJ and took hostages at three places. In this process they managed to repel Police commandoes and gave a tough fight to MARCOS in preliminary brushes. After this initial action, there tactics during hostage drama were quite refined. Terrorists tried all tactics to amplify the psychological impact by regularly putting different rooms on fire, sometime they tried to blast the dome of Taj, sometimes fired two shots towards the Media gathered outside. Above all they were able to prolong the hostage drama with full blitz, even called TV channels to enlighten the masses through venomous nature of their filtered general knowledge that their handlers made them consume during their brainwashing process, in other words jehadi nonsense. They were able to successfully engage the NSG for 50 hours. All these facts points towards high level of stamina and endurance which is achievable only through 'specialized military courses'. That's what Marine commandoes (one of the best in World) meant to say when they told the media that terrorists were 'highly trained'.
Another indicator that points toward this direction is innovative and hi-tech uses of plastic explosives by terrorists. According to Media reports, terrorists fixed explosives in dead bodies of hostages that were controlled by electronic sensors sensitive to any activity in dead body. Such hi-tech assembly of explosive again points towards specialized training. Special Forces combat teams typically consist of such explosive expert and generally deal in plastic explosives.
Why were foreigners targeted?
According to the reports terrorists specifically asked for people owning US, British and Israeli passports. Jewish Center at Nariman house was also targeted and hostages were brutally killed. This was done to achieve plausible deniability vis-à-vis the West and impart an Al-Qaeda character to these strikes, which is actually an ISI sponsored direct action aimed at achieving specific objectives. The Al-Qaeda character helps Islamabad to argue that this is something beyond their control and they are themselves targets of this.
On the other hand, plausible deniability aimed at vis-à-vis India is strikingly very low after many years. There are clear threads going back to Pakistan. Grenades used by terrorists bear stamps of Pak Govt. Ordinance Factories, terrorists regularly talked over satellite phones with their handlers in Pak during whole operation and now it is established that one terrorist caught by Mumbai Police hails from Faridkot, Pakistan. In all this is hidden the larger objectives of this attack.
Islamabad knows that it is going to come under immense pressure from Obama Administration to sincerely act against Al-Qaeda and Taliban in Tribal areas. Obama is continuously talking about shifting the main theatre of War on Terror to Afghanistan from Iraq, which means serious trouble for different establishments and their assets in Islamabad. The reason why a lower degree of deniability was aimed by perpetrators is to cause unbearable annoyance in India and knowing that the Indian government in this election year will not be able to assimilate it. It is a calculated move to ignite tensions on Indian front so as to find an excuse for not acting against Taliban in tribal areas. This is done to preempt the future pressure from Obama administration and to develop a caveat. A crisis in subcontinent will also divert American attention from Afghanistan and will change the foreign policy priorities for the region.
What this new capability acquired by Terror Groups mean?
Coming back to analysis of this new capability of terror groups based in Pakistan, there can be very serious security implications. And these implications are not only for India but also for NATO forces operating in Afghanistan in near term but also for the West over the long term. It must be the first priority to quantify this capability acquired by these groups. This new ability of jehadi groups to carry out guerilla raids of the kind carried out by specialized armed forces call for major reshaping of security strategies.
Terror strikes in Mumbai were something more than mere terror attacks. This was what terror groups were never capable of doing in past i.e. launching surgical strikes in style of Special Forces. Many may find it an over statement. But tactics employed in planning, launching these strikes and during close combat with MARCOS and NSG clearly underlines this new challenge. The whole analysis of Mumbai terror strikes point out towards this new acquisition of Terror groups in south Asia.
To clear any doubts lets revise the events. According to different reports, terrorists after being launched from Karachi hijacked a fishing boat from Porbandar then traveled towards Mumbai Coast and then again changed to small boats of the kind generally used by Special Forces to infiltrate through coastlines. According to media reports, quoting eye witnesses, terrorists grouped into teams of two each entered into Mumbai through Macchimar colony and Sasan dock and within few hours of there entering into Mumbai they started the shoot outs. They attacked almost all vital installations in South Mumbai within few tens of minutes and as it is now becoming clear two of the terrorists may have deliberately ambushed the Police vehicle carrying top ATS brass. Then they were able to carry out massacres at CST, Oberoi and TAJ and took hostages at three places. In this process they managed to repel Police commandoes and gave a tough fight to MARCOS in preliminary brushes. After this initial action, there tactics during hostage drama were quite refined. Terrorists tried all tactics to amplify the psychological impact by regularly putting different rooms on fire, sometime they tried to blast the dome of Taj, sometimes fired two shots towards the Media gathered outside. Above all they were able to prolong the hostage drama with full blitz, even called TV channels to enlighten the masses through venomous nature of their filtered general knowledge that their handlers made them consume during their brainwashing process, in other words jehadi nonsense. They were able to successfully engage the NSG for 50 hours. All these facts points towards high level of stamina and endurance which is achievable only through 'specialized military courses'. That's what Marine commandoes (one of the best in World) meant to say when they told the media that terrorists were 'highly trained'.
Another indicator that points toward this direction is innovative and hi-tech uses of plastic explosives by terrorists. According to Media reports, terrorists fixed explosives in dead bodies of hostages that were controlled by electronic sensors sensitive to any activity in dead body. Such hi-tech assembly of explosive again points towards specialized training. Special Forces combat teams typically consist of such explosive expert and generally deal in plastic explosives.
Why were foreigners targeted?
According to the reports terrorists specifically asked for people owning US, British and Israeli passports. Jewish Center at Nariman house was also targeted and hostages were brutally killed. This was done to achieve plausible deniability vis-à-vis the West and impart an Al-Qaeda character to these strikes, which is actually an ISI sponsored direct action aimed at achieving specific objectives. The Al-Qaeda character helps Islamabad to argue that this is something beyond their control and they are themselves targets of this.
On the other hand, plausible deniability aimed at vis-à-vis India is strikingly very low after many years. There are clear threads going back to Pakistan. Grenades used by terrorists bear stamps of Pak Govt. Ordinance Factories, terrorists regularly talked over satellite phones with their handlers in Pak during whole operation and now it is established that one terrorist caught by Mumbai Police hails from Faridkot, Pakistan. In all this is hidden the larger objectives of this attack.
Islamabad knows that it is going to come under immense pressure from Obama Administration to sincerely act against Al-Qaeda and Taliban in Tribal areas. Obama is continuously talking about shifting the main theatre of War on Terror to Afghanistan from Iraq, which means serious trouble for different establishments and their assets in Islamabad. The reason why a lower degree of deniability was aimed by perpetrators is to cause unbearable annoyance in India and knowing that the Indian government in this election year will not be able to assimilate it. It is a calculated move to ignite tensions on Indian front so as to find an excuse for not acting against Taliban in tribal areas. This is done to preempt the future pressure from Obama administration and to develop a caveat. A crisis in subcontinent will also divert American attention from Afghanistan and will change the foreign policy priorities for the region.
What this new capability acquired by Terror Groups mean?
Coming back to analysis of this new capability of terror groups based in Pakistan, there can be very serious security implications. And these implications are not only for India but also for NATO forces operating in Afghanistan in near term but also for the West over the long term. It must be the first priority to quantify this capability acquired by these groups. This new ability of jehadi groups to carry out guerilla raids of the kind carried out by specialized armed forces call for major reshaping of security strategies.
IB warned terrorists would intrude by sea
Sandeep Unnithan
November 28, 2008
http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21192&issueid=81§ionid=19&Itemid=1
CloseIndia Today expert view on IB warned terrorists would intrude by seaFor a coastal city that realised its fortunes from being the maritime gateway of India, the worst misfortunes have also been visited upon Mumbai from the sea.
In March 1993, shipments of RDX offloaded south of the city wreaked havoc. In November 2008, it is the possibility of heavily armed terrorists being offloaded from ‘mother vessels’ like dhows to penetrate an unguarded city coast.
This seaborne incursion makes sense in the light of an Intelligence Bureau input received by the Mumbai Police in December 2006.
THE SECRET LETTER
The contents, gleaned from interrogation of militants in Kashmir, were shocking because they alluded to a new form of seaborne terror which has ominous portents for India’s unguarded coastal cities. The input, a copy of which is with India Today, said that the ISI and Pakistan Navy is training terrorists for seaborne infiltration.
Approximately 500 to 600 terrorists had been trained to infiltrate, disguised as fishermen.
The warning elaborates 12 to 18 months of training divided into three phases: swimming lessons, handling large boats, laying mines on coasts and planting explosives under bridges and ships.
In the last phase, they are taught sea navigation— using GPS, reading the wind, waves, tides and currents, rescue operations, surveillance and concealing explosives.
Inflatable speed boat used by terrorists to land in MumbaiThe Palestinian Hamas have used the sea route to penetrate Israel for attacks; so has the LTTE in Sri Lanka. They are the only terror groups which have used the sea.
Pakistan-based terrorist groups Lashkar-e-Toiba, Hizbul Mujahideen, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, who were trained by the ISI, were forced to do so after heavily guarded land frontiers have made infiltration difficult.
The strikes, however, raise questions on how they passed through the cordon of the navy and coast guard who have patrolled the coast since the March 1993 blasts under ‘Operation Swan’.
“India is the only country where legislation prohibits the navy and the coast guard from intercepting vessels,” says Vice-Admiral Arun Kumar Singh, former director-general, Coast Guard. Clearly, another case of a lethargic security apparatus being caught napping by wily terrorists.
—Sandeep Unnithan
War on Mumbai - Open Letter to All Party Meeting
Source: OFFSTUMPED
Expectation #1 - Dont bother with the customary condemnation of Terrorism
Expectation #2 - The attacks on Mumbai were an Act of War, declare it as such unambiguosly and purposefully
Expectation #3 - Take responsibility that the buck does stop with you
Expectation #4 - Hold yourselves to a higher standard
Expectation #5 - Re-orient your mindset, reject misconceived notions
Expectation #6 - Embrace a Philosophy that calls for pre-emption and unrelenting, uncompromising action
Expectation #7 - Spell out the contours of an immediate strategy to win this War and a long term strategy to prevent the next one
Expectation #8 - Make a vow to Change atleast One thing about you post 26-11
Expectation #1 - Dont bother with the customary condemnation of Terrorism
Expectation #2 - The attacks on Mumbai were an Act of War, declare it as such unambiguosly and purposefully
Expectation #3 - Take responsibility that the buck does stop with you
Expectation #4 - Hold yourselves to a higher standard
Expectation #5 - Re-orient your mindset, reject misconceived notions
Expectation #6 - Embrace a Philosophy that calls for pre-emption and unrelenting, uncompromising action
Expectation #7 - Spell out the contours of an immediate strategy to win this War and a long term strategy to prevent the next one
Expectation #8 - Make a vow to Change atleast One thing about you post 26-11
Dear Members of Cabinet, Parliament and Political Leadership of India
As all of you assemble in Delhi at Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s insistence to debate the response of this nation, this “aam admi” felt it prudent to write to you on a couple of topics.
First please understand that while most of you may suffer bloated egos having made a career of surviving in Lutyen’s Delhi as “khaas admi”, the rest of us “aam admi” have a very dim view of your abilities. Not because of that cliched cynicism against politics but because most of you generally speaking are incompetent. You demonstrate your immaturity every time a TV Camera is in your face. You have never held yourselves up to any professional performance standards or best practices. You have never felt accountable for your actions until the very worst has happened. The buck never stops with you, it is always the next guy.
So in general, remember that as you sit down to deliberate how you intend to shepherd this nation, that the “aam admi” of this nation has low expectations of you.
With that reality check out of the way, this “aam admi” would like to get the substance of the subject at hand to spell what he expects of this “All Party Meeting”.
Expectation #1 - Dont bother with the customary condemnation of Terrorism
We all know Terrorism is bad, we have all suffered its consequences, dont waste our time with cliches that have long lost their meaning.
Expectation #2 - The attacks on Mumbai were an Act of War, declare it as such unambiguosly and purposefully
If all you can manage is a wishy-washy politically correct statement then dont even bother with it, just wind up the meeting early,
Expectation #3 - Take responsibility that the buck does stop with you
Accept that the Political Leadership of this country has failed the people and the forces. Dont pass the buck by calling it a failure of intelligence and policing. Show that you can take responsibility for once.
Expectation #4 - Hold yourselves to a higher standard
Make a solemn vow that your conduct going forward, till such a time this War on Terror is won, will be India first and Indian National Interest first. We know most of you have vote banks to worry about. Its a democracy in an election year. You are entitled to your vote bank politics. But for once use your imagination and get innovative on how to charm your vote bank while not compromising the “Indian National Interest”.
Expectation #5 - Re-orient your mindset, reject misconceived notions
Your meeting would have completely failed to meet this “aam admi”’s expectations if it were to end with pre 26-11 mindset. If after 26-11 in your world view Terrorism was still a Law and Order issue then you have learnt nothing from this incident. So reject previous misonceieved notions on the nature of Terrorism and declare in your meeting that meeting the challenges of Terrorism requires a new mindset.
Expectation #6 - Embrace a Philosophy that calls for pre-emption and unrelenting, uncompromising action
We dont need sanctimony from you. We also dont need the tired and repetitive rhetoric on “how you will not bend” etc… We know you have and we also know that left to your devices you will not think twice about bending again. So cut the literary flourish out and spell a clear and unambiguos philosophy for how you will wage this War on Terror.
Expectation #7 - Spell out the contours of an immediate strategy to win this War and a long term strategy to prevent the next one
We dont need knee jerk prescriptions. Yes we do need an anti terror law. Yes we also need a federal invetigative agency. But both will be ineffectual if they are not borne out of a purposeful strategy. So dont try to give us comfort with a set of half baked actions. An anti-terror law effective from tomorrow will make little difference in pre-empting the next war. A federal investigative agency will make little difference in taking the battle to the enemy’s frontiers.
What we need right now is a Strategy and not promises of a new law and a new agency.
That strategy should have a geopolitical dimension to it and an immediate time frame on how to respond to the Acts of War waged on us in Mumbai.
That strategy should also have a long term plan for overhauling our Institutions at Federal, State and Local level so
- there is a unified Security Architecture that can function seamlessly across jurisdictions
- is able to pre-empt and respond with a clear Command and Control Structure before Terror Strikes
- is also able to purposefully investigate and bring to Justice those who aid, abet and shelter Terror
If you leave this meeting without having demanded, deliberated and settled on the need for such a Strategy then you would have done great disservice to this nation
Expectation #8 - Make a vow to Change atleast One thing about you post 26-11
The strategy against Terror has only so much of chance of being succesful without a cultural change in society where every life matters, every individual has an identity and every community takes responsibility for its well being. So make a vow on the one personal cultural change that each one of you would make post 26-11.
With that this “aam admi” leaves you political animals to your machinations. We have no expectations that you will not play politics. Its an election year and you are entitled to it. But just make sure your politics does not come in the way of the Indian National Interest. For if it does make no mistake we the “aam admi” will be unrelenting and uncompromising in the punishment we mete out to you.
Yours Truly
an Aam Admi
P.S.: If you are wondering why I have not welcomed the resignation of Shivraj Patil, then think again. Swapping a braind dead Home Minister for a glib Sharp Tongued one is like putting lipstick on a pig. We are past the point where individuals mattered. Its about the Strategy, our Institutions and the Indian National Interest.
TERRORISM IN MUMBAI : A NATION IN PERIL
Terror now stalks the country. As one watched the TV screens on the night of November 26 it seemed a re-run of past terrorist incidents in India. Yet these were different. India has not seen a terrorist attack of this kind where terrorists have stormed a hotel, taken people hostage, killed others and have made no ransom demand so far. Obviously they are playing for publicity and merely want to draw attention to themselves and whatever be their demands. Our hysterical response on TV channels and confused response of the authorities adds to the publicity.
Anyone watching the TV scenes would have noticed that the terrorists seemed calm, physically fit and had not even bothered to cover their faces. Their demeanour was that of well trained persons, familiar with their surroundings and the task to be accomplished almost commando like in their bearing. They were either planning to drop their weapons after the act and melt into the crowd or go down fighting. The game is simple – the longer the crisis lasts the greater the publicity and greater the pressure on the government to do something. It will require consummate skill and determination to overcome this crisis with minimal loss of innocent lives.
The present lot of terrorists are not the traditional suicide bombers ready to blow themselves up. Yet somehow the manner of their arrival by boats and the physical features of the terrorists brings to mind Mumbai March 1993. At that time too a part of the plot was to carry out killings at other selected targets after the simultaneous bomb explosions. The area of operation and the targets were also quite similar – upper class and affluent. Is there a Pakistani–ISI-Dawood hand in this? It is still early days but these questions need to be asked.
In India our tendency has been to make some post event superficial changes, pious declarations of intent and condemnations of the act accompanied by horrendous photographs of the event with knee jerk expert comments from media rookies. That is until the next attack takes place. We do not even have adequate laws to deal with the threat like the British and the Americans do, and for a country that has had to face terrorism for most of its independent existence, we do not even have national identity cards because it is politically inexpedient. Our border controls remain inadequate. Post event the investigating agencies should be allowed to operate in areas and societies from where the attack is suspected to have occurred or planned. There can be little success if exclusions are made on grounds of religion or region. Public indifference to terrorist incidents may indicate that the people may have overcome fear which is a positive development but if it is because of indifference to suffering based on the hope that “I” shall not be the target because tragedies are only meant for “the other”, then we have a problem. There is inadequate public response because it is generally assumed that prevention of terrorism is exclusively the task of the state. This attitude has to change and only the state can help this change. The average citizen must be encouraged and educated to help the state by providing clues, warnings and assistance in investigations.
It has to be acknowledged that the police force is inadequately prepared to deal with the menace and it is not their fault that this is so. The Governments of the day are responsible for this state of affairs. Ill equipped, ill trained, undermanned station houses they live in appalling conditions sometimes at the mercy of the very don against whom they are supposed to protect the society. Successive governments have taken away the authority and the dignity of the profession. The public has little confidence in the force and the force is unsympathetic to the public. The witness protection schemes are badly flawed and justice is indefinitely delayed. There is little incentive for the public to come forward with evidence and little incentive for the force to prosecute.
Invariably always each terrorist incident evokes criticism about intelligence failure. In India, there is a general lack of appreciation (one suspects at the highest level as well) that intelligence agencies are the sword arms of the nation (not the government) in the furtherance of its foreign security interests and the protection of the country. In normal times, when it is the best time for the agencies to be allowed to hone their skills, develop their sources and prepare for the future, they suffer from benign neglect. Posts remain unsanctioned, purchase of new equipment is postponed and upgrading is frowned upon, all because the powers- that- be assess that the threat has passed. Yet, when an incident takes place, intelligence agencies become the useful whipping boys with politicians and others ready to shift blame as they assess their political fortunes. The best and perhaps the only way to fight terrorism is to develop and sustain an effective intelligence system, not only at the centre but at every level down to the constable. Unless we have this we will continue to get surprised. What we have today is systemic failure. All systems have malfunctioned.
A terrorist event makes a good story or ‘breaking news’ but the media too needs some rules of conduct. It is important to report the truth but it is also sometimes important when we are fighting a war to sometimes not report or to modify the report without modifying the truth. Repeated telecast of pictures of frightened families, terrified children or mangled bodies is a victory for the terrorist. He has succeeded in frightening the people. And photographs of a prospective witness circulated widely would only help the terrorist. Often we glorify a terrorist when we refer to him as a fidayeen.
All this has to change too if we want to win the war on terrorism. India must get ready to detect, deter and destroy this menace before it destroys us.
Vikram Sood DAINIK BHASKAR NOVEMBER 28, 2008
Anyone watching the TV scenes would have noticed that the terrorists seemed calm, physically fit and had not even bothered to cover their faces. Their demeanour was that of well trained persons, familiar with their surroundings and the task to be accomplished almost commando like in their bearing. They were either planning to drop their weapons after the act and melt into the crowd or go down fighting. The game is simple – the longer the crisis lasts the greater the publicity and greater the pressure on the government to do something. It will require consummate skill and determination to overcome this crisis with minimal loss of innocent lives.
The present lot of terrorists are not the traditional suicide bombers ready to blow themselves up. Yet somehow the manner of their arrival by boats and the physical features of the terrorists brings to mind Mumbai March 1993. At that time too a part of the plot was to carry out killings at other selected targets after the simultaneous bomb explosions. The area of operation and the targets were also quite similar – upper class and affluent. Is there a Pakistani–ISI-Dawood hand in this? It is still early days but these questions need to be asked.
In India our tendency has been to make some post event superficial changes, pious declarations of intent and condemnations of the act accompanied by horrendous photographs of the event with knee jerk expert comments from media rookies. That is until the next attack takes place. We do not even have adequate laws to deal with the threat like the British and the Americans do, and for a country that has had to face terrorism for most of its independent existence, we do not even have national identity cards because it is politically inexpedient. Our border controls remain inadequate. Post event the investigating agencies should be allowed to operate in areas and societies from where the attack is suspected to have occurred or planned. There can be little success if exclusions are made on grounds of religion or region. Public indifference to terrorist incidents may indicate that the people may have overcome fear which is a positive development but if it is because of indifference to suffering based on the hope that “I” shall not be the target because tragedies are only meant for “the other”, then we have a problem. There is inadequate public response because it is generally assumed that prevention of terrorism is exclusively the task of the state. This attitude has to change and only the state can help this change. The average citizen must be encouraged and educated to help the state by providing clues, warnings and assistance in investigations.
It has to be acknowledged that the police force is inadequately prepared to deal with the menace and it is not their fault that this is so. The Governments of the day are responsible for this state of affairs. Ill equipped, ill trained, undermanned station houses they live in appalling conditions sometimes at the mercy of the very don against whom they are supposed to protect the society. Successive governments have taken away the authority and the dignity of the profession. The public has little confidence in the force and the force is unsympathetic to the public. The witness protection schemes are badly flawed and justice is indefinitely delayed. There is little incentive for the public to come forward with evidence and little incentive for the force to prosecute.
Invariably always each terrorist incident evokes criticism about intelligence failure. In India, there is a general lack of appreciation (one suspects at the highest level as well) that intelligence agencies are the sword arms of the nation (not the government) in the furtherance of its foreign security interests and the protection of the country. In normal times, when it is the best time for the agencies to be allowed to hone their skills, develop their sources and prepare for the future, they suffer from benign neglect. Posts remain unsanctioned, purchase of new equipment is postponed and upgrading is frowned upon, all because the powers- that- be assess that the threat has passed. Yet, when an incident takes place, intelligence agencies become the useful whipping boys with politicians and others ready to shift blame as they assess their political fortunes. The best and perhaps the only way to fight terrorism is to develop and sustain an effective intelligence system, not only at the centre but at every level down to the constable. Unless we have this we will continue to get surprised. What we have today is systemic failure. All systems have malfunctioned.
A terrorist event makes a good story or ‘breaking news’ but the media too needs some rules of conduct. It is important to report the truth but it is also sometimes important when we are fighting a war to sometimes not report or to modify the report without modifying the truth. Repeated telecast of pictures of frightened families, terrified children or mangled bodies is a victory for the terrorist. He has succeeded in frightening the people. And photographs of a prospective witness circulated widely would only help the terrorist. Often we glorify a terrorist when we refer to him as a fidayeen.
All this has to change too if we want to win the war on terrorism. India must get ready to detect, deter and destroy this menace before it destroys us.
Vikram Sood DAINIK BHASKAR NOVEMBER 28, 2008
The Law and Economics of Pirate Organization
Source: Zero Intelligence Agents
As the UN, international shipping companies, and the naval forces of the world attempt to address the pirate crisis along the Somali coast, it seemed fitting that a paper land in my inbox addressing the internal dynamics of pirate organizations. Peter Leesoon of George Mason University examines the the organizational structure of pirate groups from the 17th and 18th century in his paper entitled, "An-arrgh-chy: The Law and Economics of PirateOrganization."
Leeson examines the system of checks and balances used to constrain pirate captains, as well as how these organizations used a form of constitution to create law and order within the organization. The historical perspective presented by Leeson, and the conclusions he draws from an extensive review of historical documents, indicate that pirate organizations were highly sophisticated entities---capable of maximizing profit and minimizing internal conflict through these mechanisms. If pirates groups were able to reach this level of sophistication three-hundred years ago, and given the increasing threat posed by pirates in the waters around the Horn of Africa, it is clearly time to start taking this threat seriously.
As a start, it may be prudent to explore the work of Leeson (he has a more recent paper on the economics of pirate groups and diversity), which can provide a foundational understanding of the organizational dynamics of pirate groups.
Pointed intelligence warnings preceded attacks
The Hindu
Praveen Swami
Weaknesses in police infrastructure facilitated the attack, government sources say
MUMBAI: India’s intelligence services had delivered at least three precise warnings that a major terrorist attack on Mumbai was imminent, highly-placed government sources have told The Hindu.
However, weaknesses in police manpower and training allowed the attacks to proceed, the sources said.
On November 18, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) intercepted a satellite phone conversation, in which a so-far unidentified caller notified his handlers that he was heading for Mumbai along with a certain cargo.
RAW analysts, however, rapidly determined that the apparently innocuous call was made to a Lahore phone number known to be used by the Lashkar-e-Taiba’s main military commander for operations targeting India, who is known only by the code-names ‘Muzammil’ and ‘Abu Hurrera.’
Mumbai Police investigators have determined that the call was made from a satellite phone that was eventually found abandoned on the Porbandar-based fishing boat Kuber, hijacked by the terrorists mid-ocean, most likely on November 19. The satellite phone also contains records of several other calls to Lashkar handlers in Pakistan.
Government sources said the RAW warning sparked a full-scale hunt for the merchant ship on which the terrorists had sailed from Karachi. The hunt was led by the Indian Navy and the Coast Guard. India’s coastal defence forces used global positioning system coordinates from the intercepted call to locate the general area in which the ship was located.
Based on the testimony of arrested Lashkar terrorist Ajmal Amir Kamal, investigators believe the terrorists hijacked the Kuber in order to avoid detection after they saw Indian patrols closing in on the area. Kamal, the sources said, has told investigators that some of the terrorists tied red ceremonial threads on their wrists to appear like Indian fishermen.
Earlier, in late September, Intelligence Bureau informants had issued alerts warning that a Lashkar unit was preparing to target the Taj Mahal Hotel. According to the sources, the warning, that was built on the testimony of arrested Mumbai-based terrorist Fahim Ansari, who told investigators in March that he had carried out reconnaissance operations at the Bombay Stock Exchange, the Gateway of India area and the Oberoi Hotels in preparation for an attack.
RAW, too, issued warnings that the Lashkar was contemplating hitting one or more hotels in Mumbai’s northern suburbs, including the Leela Kempinski.
Police sources said these intelligence warnings had led them to deploy personnel near major hotels in Mumbai, and hold meetings with hotel security heads. Parking instructions were introduced at the Oberoi Hotel, and circulars were issued to local businesses asking them to observe special security precautions. However, the restrictions were lifted a week before the attacks, after businesses and residents complained of inconvenience.
“We also removed the additional security,” a police source said, “because our manpower was stretched to the limit and the personnel we had did not, in any case, have the specially-trained personnel needed to avert a suicide-squad attack.”
New disclosures
Meanwhile, Mumbai Police sources said, the continuing interrogation of arrested Lashkar terrorist Ajmal Amir Kamal had allowed them to put together a coherent account of the mechanics of the assault.
Kamal has claimed that the Lashkar assault team, which trained in boat-handling tactics at the Mangla Dam reservoir on the border between Pakistan’s Punjab province and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, was trained to locate their targets on a high-resolution satellite map. If Kamal’s account proves to be correct, it would suggest there was no local support team in place to guide the attack — a decision that may have been made in order to ensure secrecy. A Lashkar team that landed near Mumbai last year was betrayed to Indian intelligence by its supporters in India.
The police sources said media claims that elements of the Lashkar team had checked into the Taj Mahal Hotel prior to the attack appeared unfounded, as did assertions that two of the terrorists were British nationals.
According to Kamal, the men travelled to a launching position on the Sindh coast, near Karachi, in groups of two. Each of the operatives had strict instructions to avoid personal discussions, and knew each other only by Arabic code-names.
Two suspects initially held on suspicion of guiding the fidayeen were found to be not involved and were released, the police sources said.
Praveen Swami
Weaknesses in police infrastructure facilitated the attack, government sources say
MUMBAI: India’s intelligence services had delivered at least three precise warnings that a major terrorist attack on Mumbai was imminent, highly-placed government sources have told The Hindu.
However, weaknesses in police manpower and training allowed the attacks to proceed, the sources said.
On November 18, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) intercepted a satellite phone conversation, in which a so-far unidentified caller notified his handlers that he was heading for Mumbai along with a certain cargo.
RAW analysts, however, rapidly determined that the apparently innocuous call was made to a Lahore phone number known to be used by the Lashkar-e-Taiba’s main military commander for operations targeting India, who is known only by the code-names ‘Muzammil’ and ‘Abu Hurrera.’
Mumbai Police investigators have determined that the call was made from a satellite phone that was eventually found abandoned on the Porbandar-based fishing boat Kuber, hijacked by the terrorists mid-ocean, most likely on November 19. The satellite phone also contains records of several other calls to Lashkar handlers in Pakistan.
Government sources said the RAW warning sparked a full-scale hunt for the merchant ship on which the terrorists had sailed from Karachi. The hunt was led by the Indian Navy and the Coast Guard. India’s coastal defence forces used global positioning system coordinates from the intercepted call to locate the general area in which the ship was located.
Based on the testimony of arrested Lashkar terrorist Ajmal Amir Kamal, investigators believe the terrorists hijacked the Kuber in order to avoid detection after they saw Indian patrols closing in on the area. Kamal, the sources said, has told investigators that some of the terrorists tied red ceremonial threads on their wrists to appear like Indian fishermen.
Earlier, in late September, Intelligence Bureau informants had issued alerts warning that a Lashkar unit was preparing to target the Taj Mahal Hotel. According to the sources, the warning, that was built on the testimony of arrested Mumbai-based terrorist Fahim Ansari, who told investigators in March that he had carried out reconnaissance operations at the Bombay Stock Exchange, the Gateway of India area and the Oberoi Hotels in preparation for an attack.
RAW, too, issued warnings that the Lashkar was contemplating hitting one or more hotels in Mumbai’s northern suburbs, including the Leela Kempinski.
Police sources said these intelligence warnings had led them to deploy personnel near major hotels in Mumbai, and hold meetings with hotel security heads. Parking instructions were introduced at the Oberoi Hotel, and circulars were issued to local businesses asking them to observe special security precautions. However, the restrictions were lifted a week before the attacks, after businesses and residents complained of inconvenience.
“We also removed the additional security,” a police source said, “because our manpower was stretched to the limit and the personnel we had did not, in any case, have the specially-trained personnel needed to avert a suicide-squad attack.”
New disclosures
Meanwhile, Mumbai Police sources said, the continuing interrogation of arrested Lashkar terrorist Ajmal Amir Kamal had allowed them to put together a coherent account of the mechanics of the assault.
Kamal has claimed that the Lashkar assault team, which trained in boat-handling tactics at the Mangla Dam reservoir on the border between Pakistan’s Punjab province and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, was trained to locate their targets on a high-resolution satellite map. If Kamal’s account proves to be correct, it would suggest there was no local support team in place to guide the attack — a decision that may have been made in order to ensure secrecy. A Lashkar team that landed near Mumbai last year was betrayed to Indian intelligence by its supporters in India.
The police sources said media claims that elements of the Lashkar team had checked into the Taj Mahal Hotel prior to the attack appeared unfounded, as did assertions that two of the terrorists were British nationals.
According to Kamal, the men travelled to a launching position on the Sindh coast, near Karachi, in groups of two. Each of the operatives had strict instructions to avoid personal discussions, and knew each other only by Arabic code-names.
Two suspects initially held on suspicion of guiding the fidayeen were found to be not involved and were released, the police sources said.
Pakistani leader fears death if sent from Wales
Nov 28 2008 WalesOnline
THE Royal leader of a Pakistani province told an asylum appeal hearing today he feared assassination if he was deported.
At a hearing in Newport, South Wales, his Highness Beglar Begi, Suleman Khan Ahmedzai, says he fled his homeland in Balochistan to escape persecution by the Pakistani military and intelligence services.
Mr Ahmedzai, who is referred to as the Khan of Kalat, is an opponent of Pakistan’s annexation of Balochistan in 1948.
He arrived on British shores in June 2007 following the killing of another Baloch national leader, Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, in a military raid in 2006.
In October 2007, the Khan’s application for asylum in the UK was refused.
At the appeal hearing today, the 45-year-old father-of-three said despite sometimes having up to 100 armed bodyguards with him in Balochistan, his safety could not be guaranteed there.
“If the government wants to get rid of you, it will get rid of you,” he said.
He added: “The Pakistani state even provided Benazir Bhutto with protection. Most prime ministers and presidents were very protected but from 1947 to Benazir Bhutto you can see a lot of assassinations of prime ministers and presidents.”
The Khan now lives alone in Cardiff with his family remaining in Balochistan.
He claims several death threats have been made to him directly and indirectly by telephone since he came to this country. He claims these calls were made from the Pakistani embassy in London.
At the appeal hearing, Irwin Richards, the presenting officer from the Home Office, disputed the threats were ever made.
“Even if in the alternative you are inclined to accept these phone calls were received and made of a threatening nature,” Mr Richards told Immigration Judge A Cresswell, “there is no evidence to link such calls with the Pakistani embassy in this country”.
“I would ask you to find in conclusion there is no evidence to show the Pakistani authorities have an adverse interest in the appellant.”
The decision of the appeal hearing is due to be handed down within the next few weeks.
Outside the appeal hearing, he said: “I have three palaces, a house on five acres and other houses. Whatever I have is there (Balochistan) .
“Other people come into this country on banana boats or on containers or underneath trucks but they become refugees for a better life.
“My everything is there and I have come to this country for my own safety.
“I want to make the international community aware of what is going on over there.”
He claims thousands of his people have “disappeared” over the years because of their opposition to the Pakistani authorities.
“There is a carrot and stick approach,” said the Khan. “I didn’t take the carrot because of my conscience.
“Maybe I should have taken it but I couldn’t because of my conscience.
“I was told whatever was taken from my grandfather in 1958, which was millions of acres of land, I could some have back.”
His cause is being supported by human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell.
“The Khan is seen by many Baloch people as their head of state,” said Mr Tatchell.
“His treatment by the British government has been squalid and disrespectful.
“Suleman Ahmedzai is the direct descendant of the Khan of Kalat, the monarch of the state of Kalat, who signed a Treaty with the British government in 1876, making what is now Balochistan a British Protectorate.
“His grandfather was head of state when Balochistan secured its brief period of independence in 1947, before it was invaded and annexed by Pakistan in 1948. He attended the Queen’s coronation in 1953, with other world leaders, as the honoured guest of the British government.
“Refusing Suleman Ahmedzai asylum is symptomatic of a pattern of harassment of Baloch refugees by the UK authorities.
“Pakistan’s military and intelligence services have threatened to end all cooperation with the UK unless our government cracks down on Baloch dissidents exiled here.
“This may be part of the reason why Suleman Ahmedzai has had such difficulty in gaining asylum.
http://www.walesonl ine.co.uk/ news/wales- news/2008/ 11/28/pakistani- leader-fears- death-if- sent-from- wales-91466- 22364333/
THE Royal leader of a Pakistani province told an asylum appeal hearing today he feared assassination if he was deported.
At a hearing in Newport, South Wales, his Highness Beglar Begi, Suleman Khan Ahmedzai, says he fled his homeland in Balochistan to escape persecution by the Pakistani military and intelligence services.
Mr Ahmedzai, who is referred to as the Khan of Kalat, is an opponent of Pakistan’s annexation of Balochistan in 1948.
He arrived on British shores in June 2007 following the killing of another Baloch national leader, Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, in a military raid in 2006.
In October 2007, the Khan’s application for asylum in the UK was refused.
At the appeal hearing today, the 45-year-old father-of-three said despite sometimes having up to 100 armed bodyguards with him in Balochistan, his safety could not be guaranteed there.
“If the government wants to get rid of you, it will get rid of you,” he said.
He added: “The Pakistani state even provided Benazir Bhutto with protection. Most prime ministers and presidents were very protected but from 1947 to Benazir Bhutto you can see a lot of assassinations of prime ministers and presidents.”
The Khan now lives alone in Cardiff with his family remaining in Balochistan.
He claims several death threats have been made to him directly and indirectly by telephone since he came to this country. He claims these calls were made from the Pakistani embassy in London.
At the appeal hearing, Irwin Richards, the presenting officer from the Home Office, disputed the threats were ever made.
“Even if in the alternative you are inclined to accept these phone calls were received and made of a threatening nature,” Mr Richards told Immigration Judge A Cresswell, “there is no evidence to link such calls with the Pakistani embassy in this country”.
“I would ask you to find in conclusion there is no evidence to show the Pakistani authorities have an adverse interest in the appellant.”
The decision of the appeal hearing is due to be handed down within the next few weeks.
Outside the appeal hearing, he said: “I have three palaces, a house on five acres and other houses. Whatever I have is there (Balochistan) .
“Other people come into this country on banana boats or on containers or underneath trucks but they become refugees for a better life.
“My everything is there and I have come to this country for my own safety.
“I want to make the international community aware of what is going on over there.”
He claims thousands of his people have “disappeared” over the years because of their opposition to the Pakistani authorities.
“There is a carrot and stick approach,” said the Khan. “I didn’t take the carrot because of my conscience.
“Maybe I should have taken it but I couldn’t because of my conscience.
“I was told whatever was taken from my grandfather in 1958, which was millions of acres of land, I could some have back.”
His cause is being supported by human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell.
“The Khan is seen by many Baloch people as their head of state,” said Mr Tatchell.
“His treatment by the British government has been squalid and disrespectful.
“Suleman Ahmedzai is the direct descendant of the Khan of Kalat, the monarch of the state of Kalat, who signed a Treaty with the British government in 1876, making what is now Balochistan a British Protectorate.
“His grandfather was head of state when Balochistan secured its brief period of independence in 1947, before it was invaded and annexed by Pakistan in 1948. He attended the Queen’s coronation in 1953, with other world leaders, as the honoured guest of the British government.
“Refusing Suleman Ahmedzai asylum is symptomatic of a pattern of harassment of Baloch refugees by the UK authorities.
“Pakistan’s military and intelligence services have threatened to end all cooperation with the UK unless our government cracks down on Baloch dissidents exiled here.
“This may be part of the reason why Suleman Ahmedzai has had such difficulty in gaining asylum.
http://www.walesonl ine.co.uk/ news/wales- news/2008/ 11/28/pakistani- leader-fears- death-if- sent-from- wales-91466- 22364333/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
