07-18-2006, 02:28 AM
Zero tolerance of terrorism
Terrorists struck in a big way at the financial capital of India on July 11, when they targeted Mumbai's lifeline, the local trains running in the city's western suburbs. They chose the first-class compartments because the number of passengers therein was much less as compared to those travelling in the second-class compartments. In the blasts, at least 190 persons were killed and over 650 injured.
The targets and the timings of the Mumbai serial blasts were chosen carefully to cause maximum damage, and hence maximum publicity, to show how such people could strike at will and get away. In less than 20 minutes, between 6.24 pm to 6.45 pm, the entire operation was over. The traffic was busiest at that time as the trains were crowded by those who were returning from their offices after the day's hard work. In order to cause maximum damage, the lethal RDX was used in the improvised explosive devise (IED) for causing the serial blasts in Mumbai.
This was the worst terrorist attack in Mumbai after the 1993 serial bomb blasts, which killed more than 257 people and left over 715 others injured. Incidentally, on the same day, terrorists had killed eight people, six of them tourists, in a series of grenade attacks in Srinagar.
In the current scenario of terrorism, the conventional law of war and fair play has become irrelevant. In reality, in these days of well-planned high tech terrorism, the conventional and customary approaches in dealing with new age crime have become irrelevant and outdated. No wars these days, especially the low-intensity slow bleeding one, are fought by the armed forces or four-star generals sitting in their operation room.
The days of Alexander and Napoleon are over. The noises made by the political parties calling terrorist activities as cowardly acts for attacking innocent people sound hollow for the simple reason that the terrorists are not fighting an open war. Their sole purpose is to bleed the nation that will ultimately lead to its disintegration.
Generally, public memory is short and is soon replaced by a whole set of new incidents. It is, therefore, important to remember the tremors of terrorism that Mumbai had witnessed in the past. The major terrorists operations in the commercial capital of the country are given below:
On March 12, 1993, serial blasts rocked Mumbai, killing 257 innocent people and injuring 713 others. In the same year, on October 29, blast at Matunga station killed two people, while more 40 were injured. On February 27, 1998, two persons were killed in a blast at Virar. Four years later, on December 2, blast in bus at Ghatkopar killed two passengers and injuring 49 others. Next year, on January 27, blast near Vile Parle station injured more than 30 people.
On March 13, 2003, blast in a train in Mulund led to the death of 13 innocent people. Similarly, three people were killed and 30 others injured in a blast in bus three months later, on July 29. In the same year on August 25, serial blasts at Zaveri Bazar, Gateway of India, killed 55 people, while injuring over 150 others. On May 3, 2006, blast in Ghatkopar killed one person. And, finally, on July 11, 2006, serial bomb blasts in trains on the Western Railways at six places, which shocked the entire country.
There is no doubt that the terrorists and their Pakistani mentors are following a well-planned policy to haemorrhage India. They do not feel scared because we have so far failed to send a clear and firm message that the country is no longer going to tolerate Pakistan-run terrorist activities on the Indian soil. Perhaps they are not mistaken, as the Government sends contradictory signals to jihadis across the border. In 2000, the Government unilaterally announced cease-fire and stopped all operations against terrorists and kept on extending it till it realised that it was being perceived as India's weakness by jihadi elements and their supporters.
Since the Congress-led UPA Government has come to power, it has been talking of an ongoing 'peace process' without ensuring peace at home. Regrettably, we do not have even a law to deal with terrorism. The Government seems to be following the policy of "willing to wound, but afraid to strike". Apart from not having any law, the fight against terrorism is left to each State Government on the specious plea that law and order is a State subject. Politicians of all hues are reluctant to take any firm stand against terror on the mistaken understanding that taking action against jihadis can affect their vote-banks.
It is fallacious for the simple reason that terrorism affects all communities and religions without distinction. A citizen, irrespective of his caste or creed, is interested in peace and any disturbance affects both his livelihood and personal security.
There is nothing communal about dealing with terrorism and this should be very clearly understood. There are no gains, political or otherwise, or a 'correct political approach' in soft-peddling the issue. Obviously, there is a connection between the incidents in Jammu & Kashmir and Mumbai blasts and one does not need a Solomon or an intelligence agency to tell that. The Government's basic duty is to ensure the life and security of its citizens. It will not be wrong for the citizens to conclude that the Government has failed to perform one of its most fundamental duties. The current situation is totally unacceptable, deplorable and undesirable. Terrorists are not only killing innocent people, but also targeting the economic system of the country.
Economic development and liberalisation is of no use if we continue to be soft on terrorists and allow them to have a free run in the country, from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. Our intelligence agencies routinely issue warnings and red alerts over anything and everything. A kind of ennui has set in on this policy of "I-told-you-so". This needs to be curbed and replaced with more reliable and accurate intelligence.
The Government has decided to give extension of service to some selected officials dealing with security in the interest of continuity. However, the only continuity that is being seen is in the intensified regularity of terrorism. The proof of any policy is its implementation. But before it can be implemented, a policy needs to exist. Unfortunately, it is ad hocism that pervades everywhere in the corridors of power. How many more people should die before the Government wakes up?
Terrorists struck in a big way at the financial capital of India on July 11, when they targeted Mumbai's lifeline, the local trains running in the city's western suburbs. They chose the first-class compartments because the number of passengers therein was much less as compared to those travelling in the second-class compartments. In the blasts, at least 190 persons were killed and over 650 injured.
The targets and the timings of the Mumbai serial blasts were chosen carefully to cause maximum damage, and hence maximum publicity, to show how such people could strike at will and get away. In less than 20 minutes, between 6.24 pm to 6.45 pm, the entire operation was over. The traffic was busiest at that time as the trains were crowded by those who were returning from their offices after the day's hard work. In order to cause maximum damage, the lethal RDX was used in the improvised explosive devise (IED) for causing the serial blasts in Mumbai.
This was the worst terrorist attack in Mumbai after the 1993 serial bomb blasts, which killed more than 257 people and left over 715 others injured. Incidentally, on the same day, terrorists had killed eight people, six of them tourists, in a series of grenade attacks in Srinagar.
In the current scenario of terrorism, the conventional law of war and fair play has become irrelevant. In reality, in these days of well-planned high tech terrorism, the conventional and customary approaches in dealing with new age crime have become irrelevant and outdated. No wars these days, especially the low-intensity slow bleeding one, are fought by the armed forces or four-star generals sitting in their operation room.
The days of Alexander and Napoleon are over. The noises made by the political parties calling terrorist activities as cowardly acts for attacking innocent people sound hollow for the simple reason that the terrorists are not fighting an open war. Their sole purpose is to bleed the nation that will ultimately lead to its disintegration.
Generally, public memory is short and is soon replaced by a whole set of new incidents. It is, therefore, important to remember the tremors of terrorism that Mumbai had witnessed in the past. The major terrorists operations in the commercial capital of the country are given below:
On March 12, 1993, serial blasts rocked Mumbai, killing 257 innocent people and injuring 713 others. In the same year, on October 29, blast at Matunga station killed two people, while more 40 were injured. On February 27, 1998, two persons were killed in a blast at Virar. Four years later, on December 2, blast in bus at Ghatkopar killed two passengers and injuring 49 others. Next year, on January 27, blast near Vile Parle station injured more than 30 people.
On March 13, 2003, blast in a train in Mulund led to the death of 13 innocent people. Similarly, three people were killed and 30 others injured in a blast in bus three months later, on July 29. In the same year on August 25, serial blasts at Zaveri Bazar, Gateway of India, killed 55 people, while injuring over 150 others. On May 3, 2006, blast in Ghatkopar killed one person. And, finally, on July 11, 2006, serial bomb blasts in trains on the Western Railways at six places, which shocked the entire country.
There is no doubt that the terrorists and their Pakistani mentors are following a well-planned policy to haemorrhage India. They do not feel scared because we have so far failed to send a clear and firm message that the country is no longer going to tolerate Pakistan-run terrorist activities on the Indian soil. Perhaps they are not mistaken, as the Government sends contradictory signals to jihadis across the border. In 2000, the Government unilaterally announced cease-fire and stopped all operations against terrorists and kept on extending it till it realised that it was being perceived as India's weakness by jihadi elements and their supporters.
Since the Congress-led UPA Government has come to power, it has been talking of an ongoing 'peace process' without ensuring peace at home. Regrettably, we do not have even a law to deal with terrorism. The Government seems to be following the policy of "willing to wound, but afraid to strike". Apart from not having any law, the fight against terrorism is left to each State Government on the specious plea that law and order is a State subject. Politicians of all hues are reluctant to take any firm stand against terror on the mistaken understanding that taking action against jihadis can affect their vote-banks.
It is fallacious for the simple reason that terrorism affects all communities and religions without distinction. A citizen, irrespective of his caste or creed, is interested in peace and any disturbance affects both his livelihood and personal security.
There is nothing communal about dealing with terrorism and this should be very clearly understood. There are no gains, political or otherwise, or a 'correct political approach' in soft-peddling the issue. Obviously, there is a connection between the incidents in Jammu & Kashmir and Mumbai blasts and one does not need a Solomon or an intelligence agency to tell that. The Government's basic duty is to ensure the life and security of its citizens. It will not be wrong for the citizens to conclude that the Government has failed to perform one of its most fundamental duties. The current situation is totally unacceptable, deplorable and undesirable. Terrorists are not only killing innocent people, but also targeting the economic system of the country.
Economic development and liberalisation is of no use if we continue to be soft on terrorists and allow them to have a free run in the country, from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. Our intelligence agencies routinely issue warnings and red alerts over anything and everything. A kind of ennui has set in on this policy of "I-told-you-so". This needs to be curbed and replaced with more reliable and accurate intelligence.
The Government has decided to give extension of service to some selected officials dealing with security in the interest of continuity. However, the only continuity that is being seen is in the intensified regularity of terrorism. The proof of any policy is its implementation. But before it can be implemented, a policy needs to exist. Unfortunately, it is ad hocism that pervades everywhere in the corridors of power. How many more people should die before the Government wakes up?