Dealing With Terror

The gruesome terrorist attack on the pink city of Jaipur on May 13 showed what we have known all along. India is not only a soft state, but also a soft target. Our leaders are long on rhetoric and short on action. Sixty years of history has shown that Indians are only good in opposition, but not when it comes to governance. We were able to fight the British, (possibly the only time we were united) but could not govern this country once they quit India.

Some countries, states and governments-take Israel for example-are capable of action; we are only capable of inaction. So what do we do now when the very symbol of our democracy is coming regularly under attack? As usual we talk and keep on issuing statement after statement. It is time we consider the other options we have for putting an end to terrorism being sponsored by our neighbors. Under international law, we have the right of hot pursuit. We can also take covert action against terrorist camps and profess deniability. Fears of a nuclear exchange are highly exaggerated. Clearly all is fair game in the name of terrorism. We will continue to dither and procrastinate in the name of restraint and statesmanship. We will continue to make the strongest of statements coupled with inaction. Hypocrisy has been the strongest trait of the Indian politician, and he will surely live up to his reputation. And this attitude emboldens terror outfits to target different locations in the country.

Intelligence agencies have time and again sought stricter security measures at vital installations and crowded or religious places, favorite targets of terror outfits. While strikes at vital installations are aimed at crippling the economy, targeting crowded places ensure big casualties. And attacks on religious sites further the terrorist’s game plan to create social unrest. Since 2004, India has lost more than 3,725 lives to terror attacks. The Manmohan Singh government has been under a sustained attack for its failure to effectively handle internal security. Its rivals in the Opposition have been accusing it of fetish sing the human rights of terrorists and a marked reluctance to take hard steps to deal with the problem.

We need strong legal regime to deal with terror. TADA and POTA provided such a regime. Several states have legislated POTA-type laws to deal with organized crime and terrorism after the repeal of POTA. The law and order agencies are often confronted with problems while dealing with terror crimes. The Government at the Centre, however, has been on the denial mode. The Government, which is unwilling to displease the politically correct and easy-to-offend types on their side, has been rejecting demands for incorporating tough laws in the statute to tackle the problem and giving free hand to the law enforcers. The war against terror will be won not by words but by national resolve, political courage and decisive action. This action must be motivated by security concerns and not those of vote bank politics.