Hindu Vivek Kendra
A RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE PROMOTION OF HINDUTVA
   
 
 
«« Back
Terrorised Republic

Terrorised Republic

Author: Rahul Datta
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: October 6, 2001

Introduction: 'We are outstanding in our rhetoric and abysmal in making real recommendations for action'

Dr Brahma Chellaney is a strategic-affairs expert. He is Professor of Security Studies at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi, and author of three books. Here he speaks on the question of national security.

Q: Is the Indian state prepared to deal with the challenge of terrorism?
A: Although the problem of externally sponsored terrorism has been building up since the early 1980s, successive Indian governments have done little to combat it through a prudent, enduring strategy backed by undaunted resolve. Terrorism has been treated largely as a law-and-order issue. Each time there is a major terrorist attack in any region, the Government promises to send more security forces there. To treat terrorism as essentially a law-and-order problem is to do what the terrorists want - bleed yourself. No amount of security can stop terrorism if the nation is reluctant to go after terrorist cells and networks and those that sponsor or harbour terrorists. The only defence against terrorism is offence that strikes at its roots. India also has to recognise that no campaign against terrorism can succeed by conventional means. The unconventional threats mounted by terrorists demand unconventional counteraction. Political will and good intelligence hold the key.

Q: How would you describe India's conduct?
A: India has the potential to be one of the world's great powers. It has the talent and the resources. But the problem is that it hardly behaves like a nation of a billion people. It conveys the impression of being weak, flabby, corrupt and gutless. India's poverty of goals goes hand-in-hand with the poverty in which the majority of its citizens live. With prosperity and security constituting a personal agenda rather than a national agenda, its governing elites have left the bulk of the population in destitution as they enrich, ensconce and endow themselves.

Terrorists look at India as an easy target, especially because this nation imposes no costs on them or their sponsors. In fact, India is willing to hold secret negotiations with terrorists and their patrons, as exemplified by the talks that took place with the Hizbul Mujahideen and the Hurriyat. The Hurriyat has been fattened with halwa puri by New Delhi, and many of its thuggish chieftains move around with bodyguards provided by the Government.

India's turn-the-other-cheek attitude has only incited further terrorism. Terrorists freed by India have come back to haunt India and even the West. Who should bear responsibility for the 40 fatalities in the J&K legislature attack? Pakistan that hosts terrorist Azhar Masood or India that allowed him to set up the Jaish-e-Muhammad by releasing him? Another terrorist hand-delivered by Jaswant Singh in Kandahar is under FBI investigation as the suspected financier of Mohammed Atta, the alleged ringleader in the US airborne terrorist strikes. Terrorist forces grievously miscalculated that if India, the largest democracy, can bow, they could also tame the United States, the most powerful democracy. America has responded by declaring jihad on the jihadis.

Q: Why don't our intellectuals enlighten our citizens and policy-makers about the specific steps the country needs to take against terrorism?
A: I am afraid India presently is saddled with second-rate politicians, third-rate bureaucrats, fourth-rate journalists and fifth-rate intellectuals. Have you been to any seminar or debate where concrete counteraction against terrorism has been discussed? We are outstanding in our rhetoric and abysmal in making real recommendations for action. Mere talk cannot help fight terrorism.

Intellectuals should be a catalyst for change in any society. In India, a majority of intellectuals either beat their chest despondently or beat the drum of whoever pays for their services. Politicians are the closest to the grassroots, as they have to return periodically to the people for votes. Our problem, however, is that most of our politicians are very old. At their age, they should be playing with their grandchildren, not playing with the interests of the nation. Many of our self-styled intellectuals also are old, as they are retirees from other professions. This is so different from the patterns in the more successful societies in the world. An aging leadership and a calcified intelligentsia inevitably build timidity, resistance to rapid change and indecision.

Q: The Prime Minister has warned that India's patience against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism is wearing thin. Do you think we should engage in "hot pursuit" of terrorists across our frontiers?
A: First, the message Mr Vajpayee has conveyed by writing to President Bush is that India is still hesitant to act despite a bloody terrorist attack in Srinagar on an institution that epitomises democracy. The message is that India intends to keep its powder dry and wait for yet another terrorist strike. The letter also may be read by some as proof that India will not act without America's permission. Having lived in the United States for a number of years, I know that Americans respect those who respect themselves. If India hits back at terrorists and their sponsors, the Americans will publicly protest but come to privately accept the logic of the Indian action. Hasn't the Bush team accepted, almost openly, the logic of an Indian nuclear deterrent against China and the rationale for the 1998 tests?

Second, if by "hot pursuit" you mean overt military retaliation across the borders, I think that is neither necessary nor likely to be militarily effective in uprooting terrorist cells. It also carries the risks of escalation that our lily-livered decision-makers are unlikely to accept. However, if you are suggesting hot pursuit of terrorists and their harbourers through covert military and intelligence operations, yes, such action is practicable and can help inflict proportionate costs on our tormentors.

Pakistan has pursued a covert war against India for nearly two decades. Nothing stops India from waging its own covert war against Pakistan. Yet, instead of taking the covert war inside Pakistan or fighting Pakistan in Afghanistan, we have done exactly what the enemy has desired - we have bled ourselves by battling Pakistan on our territory, in Kashmir and elsewhere. How stupid! We have allowed Pakistan to impose escalating costs on us and shown that, in return, Pakistan has no costs to bear. In such a comfortable situation, which adversary will desist from terrorism exports?

Q: But how do we build the national resolve to combat terrorists and their sponsors?
A: First by devising a counter-terrorist strategy that incorporates both short-term and long-term components. Second, by strengthening our intelligence agencies, adding more resources, and building up our ground assets in Pakistan, Afghanistan and ISI's staging grounds for clandestine operations such as Bangladesh and Nepal. We also need better intelligence assets inside Tibet and Han China. Third, by learning from the clearheaded, no-nonsense manner the United States is waging its war on terrorism and the range of tools it is employing. The Americans are combating their terrorism, we need to separately combat ours by taking advantage of the new international anti-terrorist mood. Fourth, by matching our words with our deeds. It is counterproductive to talk tough and act meek, because then warnings by the state begin to be taken as fulminations of the impotent. And fifth, by setting in motion certain elements of clandestine military and intelligence operations to bring pain to bear on terrorists and their harbourers. These operations can be gradually expanded, but we need to start without further loss of time.

India is surrounded by an arc of authoritarian or totalitarian regimes engaged in covert actions. If they are not exporting terrorism to murder, maim and menace innocent Indians, they are making illicit transfers of nuclear and missile technologies to contain India. India has to employ different tools to counter different hostile actions. But no longer can it just sit idly and hope that good sense will prevail on its adversaries.

India needs to show that it now means business. For a start, it needs to add a deadline to its reasonable demand that Pakistan return terrorist Azhar Masood. If Pakistan does not meet the deadline, India should cut by two-thirds the staff strength of ISI's nest in New Delhi, the Pakistan High Commission, and trim the size of its diplomatic mission in Islamabad to similar level. The Indian strategy's ultimate objective has to be the fragmentation of Pakistan and Afghanistan, two artificially created, roguish states with no roots in history.
 


Back                          Top

«« Back
 
 
 
  Search Articles
 
  Special Annoucements