I. Does terrorism, in fact, even warrant the attention it gets?
It is possible to argue otherwise. According to data published by the Loss Prevention Association, in 2000
80,118 people died in road accidents
5,555 people died because of terrorism (2,063 civilians+837 security force personnel+2,655 terrorists)
Given that an overwhelming majority of these fatalities took place in a single State, Jammu and Kashmir, it is tempting to dismiss terrorism as a peripheral problem and to assert that it simply does not justify the enormous financial, military, economic, intellectual and media resources now committed to the problem.
II. Wrong it does warrant our attention
2 powerful arguments
a) The existence of multiple problems does not justify ignoring one or other.
b) Terrorism, despite its small scale, holds out very real threats to India. It has been ably used by fundamentalists both as a pretext for specific incidents of communal violence and to legitimize their fascist agenda.
The best example is the al-Sabbah's campaign (1092 A.D). Al-Sabbah's fidayeen claimed the life of a single man, the Seljuk Wazir Nizam-ul-Mulk. The state apparatus Nizam-ul-Mulk had built over 30 years disintegrated with his death and the Seljuk Empire never quite recovered its unity. It is precisely this kind of outcome that terror group’s hopes its low-grade attacks against the Indian state will one day bring about.
What is it that terrorists groups actually want?
a) In its own publications, the Lashkar is remarkably clear: the destruction of a state it sees as a predatory Hindu entity, and the creation of a caliphate that would stretch from China to Spain.
b) As the scholar Stephen Cohen has noted, the "goal of the terrorist is to use an extreme act to change the way in which this group [civil society] sees reality".
c) Hassan Ibn al-Sabbah (the brilliant 11th century mystic who founded the fidayeen as a means of resistance against anti-Shia chauvinism) terror was an end, not just a means.
III. Social conditions and crises that have enabled terrorist organizations to recruit cadre.
a) Frustration and anger among young people at the failure of the state, and society to deliver justice against perpetrators of communal violence
b) Anger at the economic marginalization of their community.
IV) Medias influence
a) The conservative view muslims as five-wives fanatics while the liberals generally represents Muslims as victims. Both versions objectify the community and obscure the vibrant political life and contestation within it.
V) Security forces (from police, paramilitary to the security guard at the gate) and Intelligence department
1) They are never given credit for successes against terrorist groups: the many occasions that bombings and assassinations are prevented. Everyday we read about weapons seized, terror plans spoiled but still we see security activities as failure.
2) Successive governments have failed in giving India the police apparatus that modern counter-terrorism work requires. Unlike any other country of significance, India still does not possess a national database on terror groups and suspects accessible to forces across the country. Most police stations don’t even have basic facilities (vehicles, phones)
VI) Issues addressed by a Group of Ministers after the Kargil War.
Their recommendations
a) India would have had a new Police Act by 2003.
b) State police forces would have benefited from improved working conditions and support technologies.
c) Intelligence Bureau would have been freed from the supervisory control of the Ministry of Home Affairs bureaucrats.
d) Its new Multi-Agency Centre would have had newly raised technical staff and sophisticated computer systems similar to those used by Western intelligence organizations.
e) Border fencing
Bar some progress on border fencing the implementation scorecard is zero.
Its easy to play the blame game, buts what’s needed and what is difficult is a practical solution to the problem.