A note on the brief points made by Shri Arun Jaitley while speaking on the debate on the Mumbai blasts and national security

A note on the brief points made by
Shri Arun Jaitley, Leader of Opposition, Rajya Sabha
while speaking on the debate on the
Mumbai blasts and national security

The 13^th July 2011 terror attack at three places in Mumbai is both worrisome and condemnable. Our national concern has increased because three weeks after the blast, the investigation still has not revealed the identity of the culprits.

This attack is one in the chain of repeated attacks which have taken place in Mumbai. The 1993 serial blasts was a major terrorist attack. Bombing of Local Trains during rush hours, repeated attacks on innocents continued at regular intervals which culminated in the 26/11 terrorist onslaught – one of the major ones in the world after 9/11. The 13/7 attack appears to have the same features as the earlier attacks.

Why Mumbai Again?

There are four reasons why Mumbai is attacked repeatedly. Firstly, attacking Mumbai increases the credibility and visibility of terrorist outfits.Secondly, it exposes the weakness of our security apparatus. Thirdly, when Indian financial capital is attacked, the global attention is drawn to it. Fourthly, a terrorist outfit feels that given the demographic character of Mumbai, there will be enough protagonists in the political system, who because of compulsions of vote banks, will then advocate the soft-line on terror.

What is the spirit of Mumbai?

• Is the spirit of Mumbai only to present a superficial argument a day after the attack that the resilience of Mumbai is such that it becomes normal after every attack?

• Is it the spirit of Mumbai to be attacked repeatedly, do nothing and only wait for the next attack?

• Or is it the spirit of Mumbai to demonstrate a political resolve that it shall persuade each one of us to develop the political will and take all necessary steps to ensure that this indeed will be the last one.

How does one fight terrorism?

The most important character that a nation requires to fight terrorism is its political will. Nobody has dared attack the US after 9/11. Unfortunately, that is not so in India. We lack the political will to take all necessary steps to fight terror. Every time a Government decides to fight terror, it is told that it is either anti-minority or against Human Rights. It is told that security mechanisms and security apparatus cannot fight terror and we must resolve the root cause of terror. Political will to fight terror necessarily implies that India is determined to counter terror. A determination to counter terror will involve prevention of attack, containing an attack if it takes place and finally inflicting exemplary punishments on the terrorists so that nobody dares to attack India again. You need a State that resolves to equip itself with the necessary mechanism to comprehensively combat terror. You need an intelligence system both within and outside since a lot of terror in India emanates from across the border. You need quick response teams. You need a security set-up to combat terror as and when it takes place and you need a tough legal mechanism which expeditiously punishes the terrorists so that there is a deterrent for the future. This determination to fight terror must be extended to India’s foreign policy mandarins in the Ministry of External Affairs who knowing the full reality of where is the epicenter of terror still feel helpless in dealing with such States.

Where have we blinked?

The Late Shri Rajiv Gandhi introduced TADA when terror was at its peak in Punjab and emerging in Jammu & Kashmir. There were reported cases of its misuse against farmers in Gujarat but TADA continued. TADA was not repealed. TADA was collectively used against those who blasted Mumbai in 1993 and a campaign for its repeal began. It was eventually repealed. The terror-friendly thought prevailed. Vote bank politics won a battle – its first against National Security. When POTA was introduced, it was described as an anti-minority law. Obviously, the present UPA Government felt compelled to repeal it. But for TADA, nobody could have been convicted in the case of assassination of Late Shri Rajiv Gandhi. But for POTA, the accused in the Parliament attack case and the Akshardham case would have gone scot free. Today, the entire rationale of the campaign against the Armed Forces Special Provisions Act is to remove the provision for prior sanction against personnel of armed forces so that the separatists can file numerous cases against them. My conscience is shaken when I analyse the case of Lashkar-e-Toiba group in Gujarat which was liquidated probably by a joint operation of the Central intelligence and State Police. The Central Government affidavit before the Supreme Court affirmed this. Vote bank politics compelled the Central Government to withdraw that affidavit and instead prosecute the state officials even though the LeT website itself had acknowledged that the deceased was their operative. When terrorists were identified, some arrested and some killed at Batla House, senior politicians did not visit the house of the deceased security police officer who gave his life but cast doubts on the police theories. The village of the alleged terrorist in Azamgarh became a routine place for paying obeisance to their act. You did not have the political will to stop the separatists of different varieties from advocating secession/ separatism in the heart of New Delhi near the seat of power but you would not allow Baba Ram Dev to hold a rally in Ram Lila Maidan or Anna Hazare to sit on fast at Jantar Mantar.

Situation after 26/11

The situation after 26/11 can best be described in the words of the present Home Minister. In his 22^nd Intelligence Bureau Centenary Endowment Lecture on 23^rd December, 2009, the Minister said, while referring to the situation on 26.11.2008, “The security establishment was in a disarray and numerous questions were being asked. Had the intelligence failed? Did the first responder, the Mumbai Police, prove to be totally inadequate? Was the famed National Security Guards (NSG) too slow to get off the block? Did the leadership of the police let down its men? Did the Central forces take too long to neutralize 10 terrorists? Did the Central and the State Governments fail to provide a strong leadership? Did the management system collapse? Did the country pay too heavy a price before it repulsed the terrorist attack? Did the Government fail to believe in mounting a swift counter attack on the perpetrators of terror?”

The Home Minister then stated that he knew the answer but he would not give it. I can understand his embarrassment. The answer is a YES to each of the questions he put. He then provided a solution. His solutions included the setting up of the National Investigative Agency, bringing back some provisions of the repealed POTA in the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act., establishment of a NATGRID and the setting up of aNational Counter-terrorism Center.

Let us audit what the last three years have done.

• The three years in which the NIA have investigated the Mumbai case for such a major conspiracy which would have involved hundreds of conspirators both within and outside , only one man stands convicted.

• The wise men in our investigative and intelligence establishment could never detect the role of David Headley or Tahawwur Rana in 26/11. It is only the Chicago Trial and the FBI interrogation which could produce clinching evidence of LeT and ISI involvement. It demolished the distinction between the two.

• The National Counter- Terrorism Center is yet to be set up.

• The Natgrid ran into difficulties because of Opposition within. There are serious questions being raised whether actionable intelligence can ever be shared after the US experience where Wikileaks got hold of material which could not have got in to its custody. A question is being raised as to whether we are capable of providing firewalls around the Natgrid.

The foreign policy initiative

Unquestionably, Pakistan is the epicenter of terror. It uses terrorism as an instrument of State policy. There is hardly a major global terror strike which doesn’t have a Pakistani connection. Even China and the US now experienced this. There is now a convergence of global analysis ofPakistan. It has not cooperated in handing over the wanted terrorists. It has refused to give us voice samples of the handlers. Pakistan is an ally of the US in the war against terror. It is also an ally of the enemies of theUS in its war against terror. One Think tank in US has rightly describedPakistan as an ally but not a friend.

The Afghan Taliban is actively created and supported by the ISI. The LeT was created for the purpose of terror strikes in India. After its identification, it assumed different names. The JUD, the HUJI are all part of the same apparatus. The armed wing of the SIMI was created to provide local modules for these operations. After the ban of SIMI, most of the activists now are known as Indian Mujahidin. The Indian Mujahidin today comprises home grown terrorists but externally created and externally inspired.

Does India have the will to use a foreign policy initiative to fight terror? In the absence of any other alternative of how to deal with Pakistan, the Government has been advocating an engagement with them. The Government has been advocating an engagement with Pakistan, but the engagement will only produce results if Pakistan shuns the path of terror and becomes a more democratic and more transparent society. Today, we see dangers of a radicalized army and threats from the Pakistani Taliban of taking over its strategic assets.

While the Government engages with Pakistan and its accompanying fanfare, it must be conscious of the fact that until Pakistan alters its present course, the outcome of the talks could hardly lead to a positive result.

An Honest Analysis of Mumbai

Let there be an honest analysis of why the blasts in Mumbai took place. It is no gainsaying suggesting that this attack has come after a long time. No terrorist attack is ever acceptable. The Mumbai attack took us by surprise. To say that it was not an intelligence failure because intelligence had reported nothing, doesn’t make sense. Thus, the fact that the intelligence did not know that dozens of men and several modules were involved in attacking Mumbai at three places itself is an intelligence failure. Glib talk is not a substitute for the political will to fight terror.

Maoists

Since this House is separately going to discuss the situation emanating from Left Wing extremism, I am not dealing with it in detail. I will merely refer to the latest judgment of the Supreme Court – striking down the institution of Special Police Officers as unconstitutional. SPOs have existed since 1861. The concept of SPO is that since police cannot be present everywhere, members of the community are empowered to protect the community. SPOs have done an excellent job in Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab, North East and Chhattisgarh. In one go, the Supreme Court has deleted the institution as unconstitutional. The judgement has raised several issues. Its reading indicates that the Courts have enforced the ideology of the authors of the judgement rather than the Constitution. Judges can’t fight terror. It is the responsibility of the Government to do so. I find the principle of separation of powers , a principle so vital to the Constitutional order has been violated by this judgement. I would expect this Government to respond to this.

Conclusions

The fight against terror is a battle India cannot afford to lose. Nobody has dared attack the US after 9/11. Are we determined to ensure that this is the last time that Mumbai or any other part of India is attacked? If we believe it to be so, if we want it to be so, the Government will need a political will. National Security will have to prevail over vote bank politics. You will have to strengthen the prevention of terror, the combating of terror and the punishment of terrorists. There is no place for compassion in dealing with terror. My last advice to the Hon’ble Home Minister is to keep in mind the national interest and the feelings of all patriotic Indians. You will do this country a lot more good, if you follow a strong Anti-terror policy.