Counter-Terrorism

Instead of beefing up army/police/paramilitary forces in the towns and cities, the government needs to urgently take measures to prevent entry of the criminal and terrorist elements at or close to the border.

Lack of manpower, training, infrastructure and coordination coupled with other systemic flaws and state government’s indifference to coastal security have severely undermined the efficacy of the coastal security apparatus.

It is true that any negotiation with the outfit in the absence of Paresh Barua is going to meet only with partial success, but if the government manages to mainstream Arabinda Rajkhowa, the support base of ULFA would further erode.

Apart from the reluctance to move beyond viewing the India-US relationship through the prism of US-China or even US-Pakistan ties, the Indian political leadership and the strategic community have so far failed to define India’s role in the growing partnership with the United States.

While countries need to adopt each other’s best practices to deal with the hydra-headed monster called terrorism, there cannot be a magic bullet or a single successful counter-terror strategy.

Why are the two largest democracies – India and the United States – starkly different when it comes to tackling terrorism? The answer to this perplexing question could lie in the two countries' divergent approach to security and management of national security resources. Equally relevant is the variance in their political resoluteness in exercising suitable responses to emergent threats.

Linked to the terrorist goal of intimidation of a targeted population, there is an inherent objective to spread fear and undermine the declared values of the targeted political system by pushing a frightened society and government into overreaction. On the other hand, the counter-insurgent state wishes to downplay the impact of the terrorist attack and works towards keeping the morale of the population as well as the security forces intact. In this battle, the media plays an important and influential role.

With the killing of three women and a nine-year old girl, absurdly described as a police informer, the Naxals have lost any moral justification that they may have had to wage war against India. This heinous crime proves that their acts are much worse than the so-called police atrocities against which the Naxals claim they protect the people. This may be the last straw on an already overloaded government camel reeling under the burden of procrastination, confusion, weak governance and plain indecision.

“There is credible information of ongoing plans of terrorist groups in Pakistan to carry out fresh attacks. The area of operation of these terrorists today extends far beyond the confines of Jammu & Kashmir and covers all parts of our country…In dealing with the terrorist challenge we need to be prepared for encountering more sophisticated technologies and enhanced capabilities.”

- PM’s speech at CM’s conference on internal security, 17 August 2009

A nation-state has a responsibility to protect its women as equal citizens, yet states like Pakistan have structurally disenfranchised women from state protection by making them half citizens and reducing their right to be their own legal person. As a consequence, women have been excluded from discourses on internal and external security. In any armed conflict, women are the ones who suffer the most, yet they are embodied as symbols of honour for the state and society.