Anniversaries, the frivolity and pomp associated with some aside, are useful occasions. They are an important way to celebrate, mourn and remind ourselves of landmark events. And on the first anniversary of the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai we celebrate the bravado and sacrifice of our security forces along with Mumbai?s spirited response to a dastardly terror attack, we mourn all those who lost their lives on that fateful day, and we remind ourselves in no uncertain terms of the grave and persistent threat of terror, which waits to strike us at the next opportunity.
The real challenge for the Indian state and citizens since that day has been to make the country more secure. There continue to be two broad ways to tackle the challenge. First, by trying to bring pressure on Pakistan, the epicentre of terror groups, to put a lid on them. And second, upgrading our internal security apparatus to deal with any potential threat.
On the first, we have had only limited success. And for many reasons, we may not have much success in the near future. Going to war with Pakistan was never going to solve the problem. But the problem with dialogue, as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh just recently said, is that the government of India isn?t quite sure who calls the shots in Pakistan. It?s reasonable to assume that the army, Pakistan?s only genuinely functional institution in the larger state apparatus, still wields the most power. But, increasingly, it seems that neither the army nor the ISI nor the civilian state is in complete control of all the militant groups operating in Pakistan. That may eventually work to our advantage?if the army and ISI are hit by terror repeatedly, they may actually retaliate.
But there is an additional problem rooted in history. Whether Pakistan admits it or not, the state has officially sanctioned the use of militant Islamic groups to operate beyond its territorial borders?in Afghanistan and India, since the time of Zia Ul Haq. This was a conscious part of Zia?s strategy to legitimise his rule under the guise of establishing a true Islamic country. Going back into history, remember that right- wing Islamists never wanted partition of India on religious grounds because they believed that Islam could not be restricted or defined by territorial borders. General Zia sought to win over the Islamic right by making jihad abroad (ostensibly in the interest of promoting Islam) a legitimate enterprise.
Such is the fragility of institutions and legitimacy in Pakistan that none of his successors, including the ?secular? Benazir Bhutto or the allegedly ?liberal? General Musharraf, reversed this policy. Musharraf, who used irregular forces in Kargil, only withdrew from propping up the Taliban in Afghanistan because he had no choice after 9/11. But the army, then and now, couldn?t possibly turn all their friendly Islamist allies into enemies. Hence the only limited clampdown on the India-focused LeT, never mind the rather delayedchargesheeting of seven 26/11 accused by a Pakistan court?not coincindentally, and perhaps only symbolically, on Wednesday, 25/11.
The US, focused as it is on Afghanistan, will be satisfied as long as the Pakistan army fights the Taliban. And while the US will condemn the LeT and JeM in no uncertain terms, it is unlikely to extend its help into material terms. Prime Minister Singh?s visit to the US seems to have confirmed that.
So, on terror, we seem to be very much on our own. Pakistan, because of its complicated history and polity, is unlikely to come down hard enough on LeT and JeM. The US, because of its interests, will only give moral, not material support.
Fortunately, we seem to have done reasonably well on the home front in the year after 26/11. The appointment of the energetic and competent P Chidambaram as home minister has revitalised the previously moribund internal security apparatus. The fact that we have had no terror attack since 26/11 (in comparison with multiple strikes before that) may be part luck, but credit should also go to the revamping of the intelligence apparatus?with more competence and coordination at the top. Much more needs to be done in terms of equipping and training our security forces properly, but under Chidambaram we are heading in the right direction. The reappointment of the bungling RR Patil as home minister of Maharashtra is, however, a regressive step. There can be no room for slack at the top echelons of our internal security apparatus.
The private sector, in the meanwhile, has worked on its own solutions. Almost every premier hotel now conducts an almost airport-like security check on all visitors. Shopping malls, cinemas and other places of public interest are also better protected. And while additional security is a hassle for ordinary citizens, we have to learn to live with it and assist it. Strong cooperation between state and society within is our best bet against the danger of terrorism.
dhiraj.nayyar@expressindia.com