The Bombay Attacks By I.M. Mohsin

About two months back, Bombay (Mumbai) experienced extended devastation which held her hostage for over sixty hours. The prevailing pandemonium produced a bitter harvest of massive killings, trauma and terror. Quite naturally every sane person, regardless of his/her nationality, fell outraged, generally, at the loss of life and sufferings of the people.

have been prompted by a sense of mission or the wish to score a point in a highly competitive call wherein the stakes for the Indian audience/viewers were particularly high. However, in hindsight it now transpires that the
Bolly-wood psyche played its part in dramatizing such a bizarre event.

The media, specially the TV, gave graphic analysis of whatever was going on till the miserable episode ended. Its projection appeared to be concentrating, generally, on three aspects. First, the major focus was on
the rich local people along-with the foreigners reveling in the posh hotels and the Kandahar restaurant. They were projected to have been made to suffer the most. To the money-spinners of Mumbai, it appeared to matter
little how many poor people had been gunned down by the terrorists.
Second, their detailed accounts of the on-going botch, it is believed, may have provided useful information to the assailants. Third, as pointed out by the Daily Mail Reporter on Dec 1, “And some political observers point
out an unhelpful tendency by the Indian authorities continually to blame 'Pakistan elements' without solid evidence”.(1)

Prima facie the reports by the all networks gave a poor picture of Indian state apparatus. Despite warnings from CIA, their own IB and RAW, the executive failed to counter the emergency. Moreover, Mumbai police etc were so badly under-staffed that it did not have the capability to quell the same for almost 3 days despite elaborate operation by NSG etc.
Additionally though there were only ten gunmen of foreign origin, which remains a moot-point, yet they were able to spill despoliation for such a longtime. It is also alleged that the only asset seized by India, Kasav, was a semi-literate boy who belonged to Pakistan, but foreign agencies testified to the fact that the ‘suspect’ spoke very good English. There
was also an indication that the suspects all carried Pakistani passports and they made ‘Kuber’ calls to their mentors in Pakistan during the attacks. Such frenzy belies the experiences of experts who have dealt with sundry occurrences. In fact the intimate knowledge of the target-area displayed by the attackers would make them look-like the fictional aliens
launching an attack on the planet earth. Justifiably the New York Times of Dec 28 reported, “Indian law enforcement remains ill-prepared. The siege exposed problems caused by inexperienced security forces and inadequate
equipment,(…) There were clear signs on Saturday that the security forces were ill-prepared to handle the crisis. Much of that was because of systemic problems (…) Sharpshooters had neither protective gear, nor the
high-powered telescopes that their counterparts in Western countries… (2)

It is highly regrettable that the state machinery functioned pell-mell at the height of the crisis. This is a sad reflection on civil administration as well as the Indian army. Over the years, I have had official inter-action with our Indian counterparts and I can’t reconcile such an image with some fine officers with whom I, at times, coordinated. Brave officers like ATS Chief Karkare, whose killing within ten minutes has inspired many compelling conspiracy conjectures in the media, can be found in IPS. A shocking revelation was that his death had been celebrated by Col. Purohit and his Hindutva conspirators held in judicial custody for Malegaon and Samjhota Express bomb blasts in which many Pakistani visitors had perished.(3) It is true that there were snags in launching the forces to combat the predicament. Even the arrival of NSG etc took quite a while
which would have helped the intruders. Likewise the blowing up of the Nariman House top was a strange tactic which caused all the casualties and it has been questioned in the press. Quite surprisingly the NSC and Commandoes etc appeared to be considerably less familiar with their area of operation than were the ‘foreign’ terrorists.

As an indicator of the political realities in a democracy, the Government as well as the BJP were involved in point-scoring exercise even in the worst phase of the crisis. This may have been prompted by the-the forthcoming provincial elections. No wonder as Mumbai was in flames, L.K. Advani, the Leader of the Opposition and the man projected as the BJP’ Prime Ministerial candidate in the elections due next year, demonstrated his goodwill by calling for an all-party consensus on counter-terrorism,
Using popular rhetoric he emphasized, "at this juncture, the country needs to fight the terrorist menace resolutely and stand together"(4). In practice, however, even before the disaster had abated, the parties remained at odds on the omnipresent television coverage etc. Such in-fighting acquired a distressing dimension with the passage of time. To cap it all when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh convened an all-party meeting at Delhi on December 1, 2008, Advani and BJP President, Rajnath
Singh, abstained from attending the same and Malhotra, Deputy Leader of the BJP, represented his party.

The investigation of such mishaps poses a Herculean challenge for any state/its law-enforcement agencies.

Even the US with incomparable resources left grey areas unaccounted for in relation to the 9/11 tragedy despite the hard-work by the concerned Commission set up for the purpose. Loose Change/ Farenheit 9/11 etc raised pertinent questions about the Commission Report and George W. Bush took refuge in advancing the Security-Paradigm etc. However, it cost him and
his country the trust/credibility deficit at home and abroad. The Indians too have marshaled all their resources and foreign help. While the intelligence agencies and even the administration tried to be open-minded, generally, political leadership faltered due to either the mindset or the consideration for the fact as to which side their toast was buttered. As per an AP report filed by Aijaz Hussain on Dec 6, Calcutta police arrested 2 men named Mukhtar Ahmed and Tauseef Rahman for illegally buying the\ mobile phone cards which were used by the gunmen in Mumbai exigency.(5)

However, the IHK police denounced the arrest of Mukhtar Ahmed and demanded his release as Ahmed was one of their people who had been involved in infiltrating Kashmiri militant groups fighting against Indian ‘occupation.’ As per the police, Rahman bought the SIM cards with bogus identity by utilizing identification cards of dead persons and later sold
the same to Ahmed which were then passed on to the terrorists. Such a development is sure to open new avenues for investigation to gather viable evidence which can stand in a trial before a court of law. No wonder, the people in India and the world over are raising questions about the initial outbursts by Indian politicians against Pakistan which was tantamount to
‘blaming the usual suspects.’

Given the history of bad relations between India and Pakistan wherein Kashmir dispute is also a highly corrosive element, jumping the gun may not help. The Indian Government has been charging Pakistan, the ISI and outfits like LET, JEM for having launched the Mumbai carnage. A story has also been flashed by the media which carries many loopholes. George W’
Administration, struggling to keep India on board as a new-found ally against China, used suitable rhetoric to demonstrate its support for the victim to start with. A flurry of diplomatic activity was made to impress India. However, sanity prevailed in US’ utterances when Pakistan indicated that it would be obliged to withdraw troops from its border with Afghanistan if Indian intimidation did not abate. Such a move would have meant exposing the NATO troops to the terrible danger of more attacks by the militants. The militants also welcomed such a projected move and assured Pakistan that they would fight alongside its forces if India will attack. No wonder the US reeled back and her statements became more
balanced.

“The threat of terror in India does not come exclusively from the outside. …. Nor is jehad the copyright of one religion alone. It can be argued that international causes apart, India has jehadis that are fully home grown” Writes Anand Patwardhan.(6)
India suffers from many divisions which emanate from economic status, religion, caste and language. The instability that such serious differences produce appears to account for the periodic killings of all minorities including Dalits, the lowest caste Hindus. Pakistan appears to have a love and hate relationship with LET/ JEM etc because they fight against the occupation of Kashmir. : "India has shown us this path. We would like to give India a tit-for-tat response and reciprocate in the
same way by killing the Hindus, just like it is killing the Muslims in Kashmir" Says Hafiz Saeed of LET(7)

India tolerates Hindutva groups, Abhinav Bharat, etc whose only program is to “To keep up the purity of its race and culture,” as emphasized by Golwalkar the leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.(8) Babu Bajrangi of Ahmedabad said publicly on Tv about the Gujarat massacre, “"We didn't spare a single Muslim shop, we set everything on fire … we hacked, burned,
set on fire … we believe in setting them on fire because these bastards don't want to be cremated, they're afraid of it … I have just one last wish … let me be sentenced to death … I don't care if I'm hanged ... just give me two days before my hanging and I will go and have a field day in Juhapura where seven or eight lakhs [seven or eight hundred thousand] of
these people stay ... I will finish them off … let a few more of them die ... at least 25,000 to 50,000 should die."(9)

The Indian official oratory appears to have been driven by the domestic compulsions. No wonder it has been trying to treat Pakistan as a client state which is underlined by her demand for extradition of certain Pak suspects though there is no such treaty between the two countries. This is so despite the fact that, as South Asia Intelligence Review underscored,
“For one, it is clear that further progress in the investigation will, in no small part, be contingent on support from the Pakistani State.”(10) However, Indian brow-beating has backfired. This is so because India is not US and Pakistan is also nuclear.

Newsweek italicizes “If there is a lesson to be learned in the tragic Mumbai terrorist attacks, it is the urgent need for India and Pakistan finally to begin sharing intelligence information and start coordinating antiterrorist operations together.”(11) Either due to trauma or domestic politics, the Indian Government fell for a very aggressive attitude towards Pakistan. The present level of relationship is easily comparable to the Franco-German relationship prior to World War 1.

Despite the presumptuous jargon, India remains in dire difficulties. Arundhatti Roy, while also blaming Pakistan, states the bottom-line, “we have a military occupation in Kashmir and a shamefully persecuted, impoverished minority of more than 150 million Muslims who are being targeted as a community and pushed to the wall, whose young see no justice on the horizon, and who, were they to totally lose hope and radicalize, end up as a threat not just to India, but to the whole world. If ten men
can hold off the NSG commandos, and the police for three days, and if it takes half a million soldiers to hold down the Kashmir valley, do the math. What kind of Homeland Security can secure India?”(12)

As discretion is the better part of valor, the two countries must heed sane advice. To save their future, they must settle the Kashmir dispute in a fair manner, as recommended by so many top leaders lately. Soon they can jointly train their guns/intelligence collection on Terrorism to a final finish and avoid being on the wrong side of history.

IMMohsin
The writer is a former Secretary Interior, Government of Pakistan.
References:
1) The Daily Mail.
2) NY Times Nov 29/2008.
3) Terror Attacks on Mumbai by Anand Patwardan
published by many websites/ blogs in India on jan 15 etc after it was
turned down by Times of India while Hindustan Times sat over for 9days.
4) Carried by all dailies, TV etc.
5) --- do---- including ABC News of Dec6.
6) As in sl.no 3.
7) Arundhatti Roy’ article on Dec 13 in Guardian, The monster in the mirror.
8) ----do-----
9) -----do-----
10) South Asia Intelligence review Dec/2008.
11) Newsweek Dec 7/8.
12) As in sl nos7/8/9 above.


Global Affairs is not liable for author’s opinion

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites