Vir Sanghvi,
September 20, 2008
In the aftermath of the
Here’s my problem: I disagree with nearly every element of this consensus.
Let’s take it apart, one by one.
Domestic origin: Yes, the terrorists did not cross the border into
But does this mean that their terrorist acts were a response to events within
This does not necessarily follow. They may talk about
Nor is this a manifestation of a Muslim minority revolt against ‘Hindu majority
So it would be a mistake to see the blasts entirely in Hindu-Muslim or majority-minority terms. There is a global pan-Islamic jehadi trend and
Radicalisation of the Muslim minority: There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that these terrorists are truly representative of
It is tempting to make knee-jerk associations between cause and effect and to argue that the anger of the bombers stems from the grievances of
For much of the 1980s, Sikh militants wreaked havoc around the country. They planted explosives in cities, they killed innocent civilians in
Their terrorism did not stem from any deep-rooted discrimination against
The experience of the 1980s holds two lessons for us. One: we must not panic unduly or worry needlessly. We have survived much worse. And two: never judge a community by its terrorists. The Sikh militants did not represent their community. These bombers do not represent Indian Muslims.
So why is it happening?: Thousands of books have been written on the jehadi resurgence and I don’t claim to know all the answers. But if you think that
There is no history of anti-Muslim feeling in
So, no country can be immune to a global trend. And given the size of our Muslim population, we have done better than most.
New laws: The demand for ‘new anti-terror laws’ routinely made by the BJP is a demand for laws that allow the police to pick up people and imprison them without having to provide any evidence to a court of law.
As illiberal as it sounds, and though intellectuals in Western countries angrily fight it, this law does have some place in the battle against terror. Often, evidence is hard to come by and witnesses are nearly always too terrified to testify against terrorists. So bombers are either given bail or let off by judges — and are therefore free to strike again.
The only question to be asked in the Indian context is this: is the presumption of innocence hampering investigations? In other words, is it true that the police know who the terrorists are but cannot arrest them because of a lack of evidence? Are judges being too lenient?
The answer here has to be no. Such is the mood in the country that no judge will refuse to remand a terrorist. Besides, the problem is not that the police can’t arrest known suspects.
The problem is that they don’t know who or where the suspects are.
If the police can demonstrate to us that their main problem is a lack of evidence, then I would happily support such a law. Certainly, in the past, there has been evidence that judges were too liberal in granting bail. In the present context however, I don’t see how it would help. We had such a law during the NDA regime and terrorists managed to attack Parliament anyway.
Not only did the law not deter terrorists but it also alienated innocent Muslims who were locked up for no reason. While the terrorists are fanatics and criminals who represent nobody, it is ham-fisted implementation of laws like Tada or Pota that has the potential to radicalise the Muslim community.
The Home Minister: Isn’t it fun to attack Shivraj Patil? To laugh about his clothes? To demand that he be sacked? We are all so shaken that we need somebody we can take our anger out on.
If removing Shivraj Patil would reduce the terror threat, I would be out on the streets, demanding his dismissal.
The trouble is that even if Patil goes, it will make absolutely no difference. A sacrificial scapegoat may make us feel better but Patil’s removal will not address the basic problems in our fight against terrorism.
Nowhere in the world is the battle against terrorism conducted solely by the police. A beat constable may notice something: a suspicious package or strangers in a locality. But in a city as large as
The only way to fight terror — as the experience of
The basic weakness in the Indian battle against terror is the abysmal quality of our intelligence. Over the last few years, the security services have failed to do much more than provide cover-your-ass warnings (“There is a possibility of a terrorist strike in
It is now clear that the recent blasts in many of our cities are linked. But even though the intelligence services always announce, after each blast, that they’ve arrested ‘the terror mastermind’, the reality is that they don’t have a clue.
Otherwise they would find the network and disable it. At the very least, they would have specific information about the next blast. But each time there is a terrorist strike, the agencies are clueless.
It will not help to sack the Home Minister. But it will help if we demand some accountability from the intelligence agencies who must answer for their failures. Perhaps they need more resources — CCTV cameras on the British pattern is one demand — in which case, these must be granted at once.
But instead of wasting time on debates about Pota and Shivraj Patil’s clothes, let’s get to the heart of the problem: why don’t our intelligence agencies ever know anything?
Until they find out who the terrorists are and track them down, innocent Indians will continue to die.
Source: Hindustan Times, New Delhi
URL: https://newageislam.com/islam-terrorism-jihad/after-delhi-blasts-indian-muslim/d/781