Averting terrorism: Can the West be our teacher?

Shafey Danish

One of the problems with finding solutions to a problem like terrorism is that the issues that lead to its genesis are complex and diverse. They can never as easily be compartmentalized as measures that seek to addresses them. We may say that the Mumbai terror attacks were a failure of our country’s security apparatus, but it is not just that. We may go a step further and say it is a failure of the political class, but it is not just that either. At a different level we may try to explore terrorism as a modern phenomenon, a product of extreme ideologies which have come to exist as a counter point to materialism but even this is insufficient as an explanation. They may have their genesis in the strategic policies of different countries or may be the products of misinterpreted religious beliefs. Terrorism exists because of all this and many other reasons that are too weighty to be dealt with here. The breakdown of communities, the dispossession of large sections of population, and the absence ethics from our education system etc are but a few to be mentioned. The world at large is grappling with the horrors of blind, illogical violence. India especially has been its victim. Which is surprising as it does not have many of those prerequisites that lead to the genesis of terror. This is perhaps one of the strongest reasons to suspect that much of the terror India faces is sponsored, and is not caused by any spontaneous reaction. The West on the other hand does not face terror on the scale that India or other countries of South Asia do. Maybe there are lessons that the Indian ruling class should learn from the West. Here are a few that come to my mind. Anti-terror expertise We have simply not gone about the task of tackling terror in a systematic and professional manner. We have taken piecemeal measures, and much of the internal debate revolves around them. Bring in anti terror law, set up an agency, have more NSG commandos (something that we realized only after seeing them in action during the Mumbai terror attacks) and so on. Whenever we want to give the impression that we have given an issue some thought we set up a commission. Which of course leads nowhere. Against this look at the response of America post 9/11. Its counter terror mechanism is both more solid and more impervious to political interference. Post 9/11 the US created a whole new department of Homeland Security. The department brought under its control aspects of security as diverse as immigration to port security to educating common American as to what they could do at the time of a terror attack. Extensive laws which mandate the tapping of phones, round the clock surveillance, detention on suspicion etc bolster the operation of this agency. (Though allowing confession that may have been given under duress in police custody is not admissible as proof.) Our own security agencies have been crippled by excessive political interference, lack of funds and inadequate infrastructure. The CBI, the NSG and the IB have been put to uses that they were not meant for. Protecting political figures has become one of the main functions of the NSG while CBI probes are used to settle political scores, IB is used to gauge public mood ahead of elections and to keep a track of political opponents. The RAW has recently been mired in much controversy, from that of having an incompetent head to that of sexual harassment of one of its employees. We need to deal with terror in a more holistic manner if we are to contain it. Which leads us to Politics We perhaps need to change our entire political culture. The terrorists’ attacks of the last several years have demonstrated how divided our political class is. It is not above using the attacks for political gains. It is not above indulging in the blame game. It has time and again attributed blame for terror attacks in a knee jerk fashion, within minutes of a terrorist strikes. It seeks more to allay the public anger in the short term and then places its faith in the short memory of the electorate and the media. This has led to the sad situation where not a single case of terror has been decisively solved, even though reams and reams have been written in the media on the ‘plots’ and a galaxy of masterminds have been arrested. The political class needs to treat this serious problem seriously, looking at long term solution and not at short term electoral gains. It needs to make appointments on the basis of merit and not on the basis of loyalty. Elite institutions, in this case, of security, must be left alone and allowed to function without political interference. But here one must sound a word of caution. Leaving an institution alone does not mean turning them into personal fiefdoms of their heads. There should be a system to fix accountability for those who fail to perform. But how can irresponsible political class fix accountability for others? In this case changes have to come in the type of leaders we send to our legislatures. The political class in the West on the other hand stands united against terror. Views do not differ by much across party lines. There may be differences as to the means, but there are hardly any about the ends. There is an absence of empty rhetoric. There is an absence of point scoring. These are things our politicians can learn from the West. For this we need to bring a change in the electoral process itself. US, after all the battering it has received in opinion polls, is still able to have an electoral process that is intensely democratic; from nomination to the final selection of the President. India needs to commit to such a democratic process. Which leads us to ‘us’ Leaders are ultimately elected by the electorate, and are a reflection of the values they cherish. In places where the public has learnt to look with awe on those who have ‘bahubal’ and crime is seen as a defiance of the system, it is only natural that a strongman with criminal antecedents will come to power. In places where the ability to get around the law is prized, and is taken as a measure of a person’s ingenuity (I am referring to the culture of ‘jugaad’ or ‘managing’. This refers to getting something done that could not have been possible in a lawful manner) it is only natural that a serial law breaker will come to power. How can we even begin to think of having incorrupt government agencies when every department is filled with people, who think it their birth right to demand money for their services? And how can we expect to have incorruptible leaders when the public is ready and willing to shell out money to get itself favoured out of turn? Look also at the hooliganism displayed in the name of protesting. It seems there is no saner course than blind anger. No means to protest than burning up cars, vehicles and stoning buses. Look at the hysterical way the media reports incidents of terror and then think whether it is possible to have a sane probe under such conditions. Contrast this with the restraint and the mature reporting in western media, and the measured response of the public itself. Even in the aftermath of 9/11, there were long marches against the Iraq war in the US and in other parts of the Western world. These issues, though only tangentially related to terror, actually lie at the root of an irresponsible political culture. The issues, the problems that India faces are interlinked and there are no solutions that would solve the problem in a hurry. But somebody has to make a beginning of cleaning out the Augean stables.