The Hindu Business Line : The war against terrorism

There is constant pressure by the security agencies at the `micro' or grassroots level. This goes largely unnoticed by the public and is what is keeping criminals and terrorists at bay. A further strengthening of the national security apparatus will lead to fewer terrorist strikes, an important progress vis-à-vis a situation where there is no security.

Why do misguided, brain-washed, fanatical people undertake suicide missions? The short answer is they consider themselves to be part of an intensive, single-minded, determined campaign to hit what they perceive to be the enemy.

In the case of the recent train blasts in Mumbai, the enemy was the Indian Republic, the people who actually fell victim to the explosions being considered as mere pawns in a much larger campaign which extends across national frontiers, the focal point of which is conceivably the Great Satan embodied by the US and all that it stands for.

In the case of the July 11 Mumbai blasts, probably no suicide bombers were involved because, as of now, there is no reported circumstantial evidence pointing in that direction. But the evidence available may change and alterthe mechanics of the dastardly act, which will throw further light on the `implementation' aspect of terrorism in the subcontinent but not on the well-established fact that India is a prime target of terrorists.

The worrying inference here is that more such heinous acts are in the pipeline and that the authorities would do extremely well (as they are no doubt doing) to be on their guard to foil such activity.

Intelligence not sufficient

This leads us to the main point of this write-up, namely, whether the preventive official agencies played their role effectively in the run-up to the Mumbaiblasts, and whether, therefore, there is any justification in the charge that had they been more alert perhaps the scale of death and destruction would have been restricted.

On his recent trip to Mumbai, no less a person than the Prime Minister himself focused attention on this aspect of July 11 when he said that, though at the `macro-level' the authorities had "information about the terrorist activities in (Maharashtra)," at the `micro-level' there was no prior intelligence inputs on the blasts. As the Prime Minister is quoted to have said, information gathered at the micro-level "was not sufficient".

To put matters in perspective before one proceeds any further, it will perhaps not be out of place to labour the point that, to outsiders as a genre vis-à-vis the national security apparatus, it is always easy to point an accusatory finger at the authorities for not having done their job effectively whenever there is a national tragedy of this sort.

But the question to ask is: In the total absence of security, would the problem have been worse? In other words, are terrorists today being deterred in any way by the existing security arrangements (no matter how inefficient they are) from plying their trade with even more abandon and effectiveness than they are in fact doing now?

Relative security

What this means is that the entire problem must be viewed in a very relative sense, namely, that a further strengthening of the national security apparatus will, without fail, lead to fewer terrorist strikes, which should be seen as important progress vis-à-vis a situation where there is no security worth the name and criminals are free to strike at will whenever and wherever they feel like doing so.

After all, the World Trade Centre in New York was brought down despite the formidable presence of the FBI; similarly, the Madrid and London bombings took place despite the fact that there were present well-oiled, state-of-the-art security devices (both in terms of equipment and personnel) to prevent them from happening.

To dwell a bit more on the security arrangements at the `micro-level,' the Prime Minister is reported to have told a press meet in Mumbai that, though it may not be always possible to pinpoint the location or time when terrorists will strike, there is the distinct need to "upgrade intelligence and technological capabilities, using electronic surveillance systems and strengthening communication and access control at vital installations."

Indeed, one remembers the reruns of the closed-circuit film showing the London underground suicide bombers doing their dummy-runs, their every activity and gesture being caught on film, the only disappointing point being that the footage turned out to be useful after the event and not before it.

Small but effective

One report said that the Prime Minister gave the clear impression that "he was not happy with (Maharashtra's) ground-level intelligence gathering capabilities" and that there was "a need to vastly upgrade skills in this area."

As far as the upgradation of skills is concerned, he is absolutely right when he says this but — and it is important to acknowledge this — it is also a fact that the work of the security agencies at this level in various States is already substantial, something that is most certainly known to the people on the other side of the divide which, in turn, has made them extra-cautious.

True, out of 10 informers working for the intelligence agencies, as many as seven may not be up to the mark, but it is the remaining three who are feared by the targets and who probably comprise the vital spoke in the wheel of the unhindered operations of the terrorists.

Indeed, the last sentence holds a circumstantial key to the success or otherwise of the preventive actions taken by the nation's security agencies against people who are out to create total havoc in the normal life of the republic.

Why is it that more such Mumbai-type blasts are not occurring more regularly in cities as crowed as the western metropolis, something which the enemies of the nation would dearly love to perpetrate to attain their objective?

This is not happening precisely because the criminals are always on the run because of the constant fear of being discovered and apprehended, which is the direct result of the pressure generated by the security agencies at the `micro' or grassroots level.

This is something which is not publicised but which is happening on a daily basis, unnoticed by the public at large and away from the glare of intrusive public attention.

When the problem of terrorism and the prevention of terrorist acts is viewed through this prism, the importance of the Prime Minister's focus on the `micro-level' becomes even more pronounced, not merely as a further means effectively to engage the criminals but also to underscore the point that good work is already being done in the sphere.

When terrorists have to spend months or even years to plot their next major strike in a target area as populated as some major Indian cities are, one cannot but doff one's cap at the `micro-level' work being done by the intelligence agencies, the associated point being that anti-terrorism intelligence activity in this specific sphere needs to be strengthened no end.

More Stories on : Terrorism | Wide Canvas

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
The BoJ jolt

Whining and whimper in the CA camp

RTI campaign

Living with failure

The war against terrorism

Divestment not really crucial to reforms

HR's boundary with business is now porous

Continent going hi-tech on identity

Policy on biofuel

Corporate ethics