'A Deliberate Design To Create A Communal Divide In J&K'

Mr. Speaker, Sir, terrorist groups being mentored from across the International Border/Line of Control inJammu and Kashmir have struck once again -- this time on the famous Raghunath Temple of Jammu. Theseterrorists have demonstrated their total lack of concern for the overwhelming yearning for peace demonstratedby the people of Jammu and Kashmir when they braved violence and exercised their right of vote in the recentLegislative Assembly elections. The terrorists have simultaneously shown their disdain for internationalopinion and the efforts of various countries which have been trying to apply moral and diplomatic pressure toend cross-border terrorism in India.

In the last three days, there have been a series of attacks by terrorists, chief among which were asuicidal attack in CRPF camp at Pamposh Hotel Complex, Srinagar on 22^nd November and targeting theJammu-bound Army convoy through an IED near Jawahar Tunnel on 23^rd November. These and the presentattack on Raghunath Temple makes one speculate whether it is a mere coincidence that this spate of terroristincidents has occurred just when the process of Government formation has been completed in Pakistan. The spurtof violence also follows the release by Government of Pakistan of the Chief of LeT, Hafiz Mohammad Sayeed.After his release, he vowed to continue the "Jehad" in Jammu and Kashmir and gave a publiccall to step up terrorist violence in Jammu and Kashmir.

Monitoring of the communication network of terrorists indicates that the Jammu attack is the handiwork ofAl Mansooran which is a cover organisation of the Lashkar-e-Toiba.

The present incident has been aimed at innocent civilians at a public place of worship. Earlier in Marchthis year also, the terrorists had carried out an attack on the Temple in which five persons were killed. Thethree terrorists responsible for that assault were also eliminated.

According to reports, late on Sunday evening, two terrorists appeared at Raghunath Mandir Chowk,Jammu. One of them forced entry into the Mandir Complex and hurled grenades, thereby creating panic inthe area. People started running helter skelter. Taking advantage of the situation, the terrorists mingledwith the crowd and entered Raghunath Mandir. When confronted by a CRPF constable, the terrorists openedindiscriminate fire, killing him on the spot and causing casualties to a number of others including civilians.However, the Pujaris managed to close the sanctum sanctorum, forcing one of the terrorists totake shelter on the periphery of the sanctum sanctorum. The CRPF personnel guarding the temple laid acordon to prevent the escape of this terrorist. The operation at Raghunath Temple had culminated with theelimination of the terrorist hiding in the Mandir late on 24^th November evening.

At the same time, the second terrorist escaped in the melee towards Panjbakhter Road, opened fire andlobbed grenades. This place is located just a few hundred metres away from Raghunath Temple where another ShivMandir called Rupaya Wala Mandir is located. Alert JKP personnel closed the doors of the ShivTemple, preventing entry of the terrorist. The terrorist resorted to firing from a congested area adjoiningthis Shiv Mandir. The area was then cordoned off and this terrorist was killed this morning (25^thNovember).

The State Government has intimated that at the time of the earlier terrorist attack on the Raghunath Mandirin March, 2002, the complex was guarded by 2/8 Guard of SSB personnel, besides local police for frisking etc.,which was subsequently replaced by one platoon of CRPF. This was further augmented by deploying one sectioneach of CRPF at Raghunath Chowk and Hari Market entry points of the temple. In addition, local police aredeployed also at various check points in and around the temple.

In this terrorist attack on 24^th November, 12 persons including one policeman, one CRPF jawanand one militant were killed. Around 52 persons sustained injuries. One more injury to a Deputy SP occurred inthe Shiv Mandir incident today (25^th November) when the second terrorist was killed.

Today (25^th November) morning, His Excellency the Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, hon. the ChiefMinister accompanied by the Deputy Chief Minister and senior officers visited the encounter site and thehospital and took stock of the situation. Hon. the Chief Minister also took a meeting with senior policeofficials yesterday to take further measures for strengthening security in the State particularly in the Jammuregion. A meeting of prominent citizens is also being held by the hon. Chief Minister at Jammu to seekco-operation of people in fighting terrorism in the State.

As a precautionary measure curfew has been imposed in Jammu town.

Government has also sent a team including Shri I.D.Swami, Minister of State for Home and Director General,CRPF to Jammu today.

The above incident is part of a deliberate design to create a communal divide in J&K. The people of theState, we are sure, will defeat these designs.

Government remains committed to provide all assistance to the Government of Jammu and Kashmir in its fightagainst terrorism.

May I ask all Members of the House to join me in strongly condemning the incident and those responsible forit and also in offering condolences to the families of those killed in the incident and in reiterating thecountry’s resolve to take all possible steps to combat and to defeat the scourge of cross-border terrorismin all its forms.

The Deputy Prime Minister's reply to the debate (rough literal translation)

In sum, all the statements have been constructive. Whatever was said by the government about yesterday'sincident - the analysis given - has been affirmed. That this incident is a part of cross-border terrorism andPakistan is responsible for it. Those who have been killed or those injured have been condoled and sympathyexpressed towards their families.

It is not known from newspapers, but out of those citizens who died, there is one Muslim citizen too andthe injured include 7-8 Muslim citizens, because the people nearby were also affected. 

Majority of the people got injured from the grenades, not from AK-47s -- majority have been injured fromgrenade splinters. Two or three important points come up in this regard:

One, the centre is accountable for cross-border terrorism, as stressed by Somnathji, and as such, toprevent it, the centre is responsible and not so much the state. I accept this, and that's why when SayedMufti Mohammed Saheb came here before taking oath as the chief minister and met me, I stressed that you areforming a new government, as per our analysis, the state government will primarily have two responsibilities:

• to achieve victory over the cross-border terrorism and 
• to carry forward the work for the welfare and development of the people of the Jammu and Kashmir who havevoted you into power.

The centre would want to co-operate with you for both these jobs and to give you full support. This is whatI had pointed out to him.

Today, this was raised again and again. If anybody said this, then they are criticising it. At least in myaccount, I did not, overtly or covertly, criticise the government of Jammu and Kashmir. I have not said thatthis incident has happened because people have been released. I believe that such an incident could have takenplace no matter which government with whatever policy had been in power. 

These incidents which are taking place are being organised by our neighbouring country and they are notready to abandon terrorism, carrying forward  their policy of the war of 1971. 

The central government is responsible for the security of the country. The full parliament is committed toend terrorism and for fulfillment of this commitment, if any state government takes any important decisionsthat affect the country's fight against terrorism, then I would certainly expect that they consult the centralgovernment.

Sir, as for the question which I have been asked repeatedly - whether all the decisions, whether they areright, whether they have been taken after consultations with me, then I would say, no. I have maintained thateach state has its own rights and if the government there wishes to use them, I would not be an obstacle. Ourfriends from West Bengal are sitting here - I am not commenting on right and wrong; if some other membercomments on it, then nobody should have any objection, at least I would not do it. Every one is entitled totheir own opinion but when it was said - "Is it not true?" ... Chaturvediji and Jaipalji perhapssaid if it is not true that each decision has been taken after consulting you, then I would say, No.

Shri Satyavrata Chaturvedi (Khajurao): I stand by whatever I said.

Prof. Vijay Kumar Malhotra (South Delhi): The Home Minister is saying that he was not consulted…… (Interruptions)

Shri Satyavrata Chaturvedi (Khajurao): I spoke in the context of the release of the separatists. (Interruptions) The decision was taken afterconsultation with the central intelligence agency. (Interruptions)

Shri Prabhunath Singh (Maharajganj, Bihar): The hon. minister is saying that whatever their right is, that won't be interfered with...but this country isa union (sangh) and incase because of a wrong decision by a chief minister or government, if the honour orsecurity of  the country are affected, then in that case what would be the role of the central government...(Interruptions) ... I want to know this from you, would you not be able to do anything in that case?

Shri L.K. Advani: This question does not arise today. The government was formed only a month back. What I know is that beforethis government was formed ....(Interruptions)

Shri Prakash Yashwant Ambedkar (Akola): Sir, I am on a point of order..… (Interruptions)

Mr. Speaker: Under what rule are you on a point of order?

Shri Prakash Yashwant Ambedkar (Akola): Sir, I am on a point of order under Rule 356.

The Congress Party which is a part of the Government ruling in the State has alleged that the CentralGovernment has been consulted while freeing the terrorists while the Home Minister is saying that he was notconsulted. I think this point should be clarified first.

Shri L.K. Advani: I am not concerned. … (Interruptions)

Shri Prakash Yashwant Ambedkar (Akola): If he is not clarifying, I would ask Shri Reddy to stand up and say whether he is going to move a privilegemotion against the Minister or not….… (Interruptions) It should not be that the House is beingtaken for a ride either by the Congress Party or the BJP. It is the Congress Party which is taking the Housefor a ride…… (Interruptions)

Mr. Speaker:  This point of order does not arise out of Rule 356 because the Rule is quite clear. Therefore, Idisallow your point of order.… (Interruptions)

Shri Prakash Yashwant Ambedkar (Akola): The BJP is saying and the Home Minister is on record that he had not been consulted. This is misleading theHouse and the country also….… (Interruptions) This point should be clarified. I want to know fromthe Congress leader whether he is going to stand by what he is saying or going to move a privilege motionagainst the Home Minister…… (Interruptions) It is not an issue which should be taken lightly.

Mr. Speaker: You have quoted the wrong rule and therefore, I am disallowing you. … (Interruptions)

Shri Shivraj V. Patil (Latur): I do not want to spoil the atmosphere in which the hon. Deputy Prime Minister started the debate and the otherhon. Members responded to it.

The only information which we had received was that before releasing the detenues, the Intelligence Agencywas consulted, and not the Government or the Minister. The Intelligence Agency was consulted. They might haveconcurred or they might not have concurred, but it was consulted. That was our information. If thatinformation is correct, it is the responsibility of the State Government as well as, to some extent, theIntelligence Agency because it was consulted. Nothing more than that. We are not blaming any Government.

Shri L.K. Advani: Hon. Shivraj Patilji is wise in this matter. I was surprised when Jaipalji and Chaturvediji said this.Intelligence agencies are never brought in. Neither do I bring them in, nor should anybody else bring them in.. (Interruptions) I am clarifying that there was no consultation with the central government on this.I would further like to state that when some people were released, a letter was written to the stategovernment on behalf of our home secretary not to make any haste in this matter and that it would be better ifthe work was done after consultations.

Shri Prabhunath Singh (Maharajganj, Bihar): These people are releasing the terrorists ... (Interruptions)

Shri Satyavrata Chaturvedi (Khajurao): It would be difficult if you talk like that. We do not wish to talk at that level, but I want to say, did theBJP government not release the Hurriyat people? Did you not talk to Hizbul Mujahiddin? (Interruptions)We can ask a lot of questions. (Interruptions) Don't talk like that. (Interruptions)

Shri Ashok Pradhan (Minister of state for Labour):  They were not released for any home minister's daughter.

Mr. Speaker: This is not the way to have a debate. This is a very serious issue. People have been killed. Please think ofthat. Really the hon. members have addressed the issue in a nice way. Let the same atmosphere continue. Letthe hon. minister reply.

Shri L.K. Advani: I am grateful to the entire parliament. Apart from a stray observation or two, in all about terrorism andthe analysis of the terrorism taking place, is not being done by a terrorist organisation but it is being doneat the behest of the neighbouring country. Terrorist organisations are evil but terrorist states are even moreevil. This fact is still not being understood by the whole world. They think terrorism is wrong and haveidentified Al Qaeda and Taliban as the source of terrorism. But the world should recognise that a very bigsource of terrorism is ISI and it is a part of the Pakistan establishment. 

After the attack on the parliament on December 13, when I went to the USA on their invitation, I realisedthat they consider terrorism wrong and also that Pakistan is behind the terrorism happening in India, but alsothat they feel that the person in charge of Pakistan "he is their best bet". OK, we shall not gobeyond a limit. I am mentioning this here because this perception is wrong that India while deciding itspolicies comes under any foreign pressure.

This government does not accept any pressure. We do not accept this. Mulayamji is not here, Akhileshji issitting here, we believe that that the international opinion to deal with terrorism is irrelevant.

I was listening to everyone peacefully. I would like to say that from the beginning when we talked offighting terrorism, we believe that India has to win a decisive victory over terrorism. But it helps to havethe international opinion on your side and to get that help we have to make them realise that though today wemight be troubled by terrorism, and they might be saved by distance, but they shouldn't be under the delusionthat this distance shall always save them. With these words, the prime minister had addressed the AmericanCongress: "Do not think that your distance is always going to provide you immunity from this scourge ofterrorism."

I am mentioning this because the Indian government has constantly tried to make the international communityrealise this deliberately. Our endeavour is that they should understand, and to an extent, they haveunderstood too. If they had not, they would not have put pressure on them [Pakistan]. They have put pressureon them, but not as much as required. It is true that on one hand they do terrorism and on the other they geteconomic help. That economic assistance is used against us. So whatever we have to say, we have said clearlybut the greatest danger to democracy is what we have tried to stress the most.

That is why we have made a joint working group with England, France and Germany. That is why we have alsosigned the extradition treaties with them. We have also made a joint legal action treaty with them. All theseefforts have their usefulness, a limited utility. But primarily, whatever success we have achieved has beendue to our security forces and our people.

Ram Nagina Mishraji was right when he said that after the atmosphere in Gujarat, they would have thoughtthat by attacking the  Akshardham temple, the fire would be fanned once again, again something wouldhappen. But it did not. Who should get the credit for that? The people of the country. Their intentions wereserved before the attack on Akshardham. They do it constantly. They tried doing the same here too, but thepeople of Jammu and Kashmir have given them a fit and appropriate response. This is a matter of happiness forus.