Tackling Terrorism

It is interesting to note the giddy veering of India's political rhetoricfrom belligerence in the immediate wake of the Mumbai blasts, to conciliationjust a couple of weeks later. Interesting, but not surprising.

This has long been the pattern of political postures under successive regimesin Delhi, and it reflects a high measure of political indifference to the courseof terrorism and the continuous loss of life in terrorist and insurgent strifein the country.

It is my contention that politicians will pay attention to the rising tide ofterrorist and insurgent violence and the Pakistani conspiracy to destabiliseIndia through sub-conventional war, only after public security and terrorismbecomes major electoral issues, and when parties find that they are at risk ofbeing voted out of power, if they are perceived as having failed to take theright stand on these issues. Regrettably, politicians themselves are not goingto bring these knotty problems to the centre of the democratic discourse. It iseasier to manipulate caste and communal vote banks, or to purchase votes throughbribery and blandishment, than to secure a mandate on complex issues such asterrorism and insurgency, and then be committed to demonstrating successes inresolving these. Thus, other than the opportunistic noises that politicalparties make against incumbent governments after each major terrorist incident,there appears to be a fairly wide consensus that a measure of discretion in thediscourse best serves political expediency on this thorny problem.

It is, consequently, the people who will have to force national attention onterrorism by making this continued neglect politically unsustainable. But thereare difficulties here as well. I have repeatedly and approvingly written aboutthe resilience of the Indian people, the manner in which they return to normallives within days, indeed, often within hours, of a major terrorist incident.This is, at one level, the best response to the terrorists, a clear message thattheir senseless violence can achieve nothing. On the flip side, however, this'resilience' creates the very spaces for the country's political leadership toignore the problem and return to the petty and partisan squabbles that dominateParliament, and the numbing routines that dominate governance, from day to day.

It is necessary, here, to do two apparently contradictory things at once. Toreturn to 'normal life' as soon as humanly possible after a terrorist strike;but also to keep our sense of outrage alive and to work on a daily basis tocommunicate this outrage to the political leadership, even as we translate itinto small but significant acts at the personal level that will make futureterrorism more difficult - greater vigilance, cooperation with enforcementagencies, a determination not to fuel the problem with our own communalism, withour own contribution to the enveloping exploitation and discrimination thatcharacterises attitudes towards the poor, the weak and the dispossessed; and,crucially, greater understanding.

This last - understanding - is the most important. It is the incomprehensionand ignorance, not only of the masses, but of the country's elite, its'intellectuals', administrators and political leadership, that has allowed themost unforgivable rubbish to dominate the discourse on terrorism, and that hascontributed directly to mechanisms and actions that help paralyse the state inits responses to terrorism.

Even today, after decades of dealing with the problem, the establishment inthis country continues to discuss terrorism in politically correct slogans. Wehave people who have no understanding of the dynamics of terrorism engaged in acontinuous and systematic denigration of police and paramilitary forces and theArmy from purported 'human rights' platforms, and many of these people are partof organisations that are no more than overground fronts of the terroriststhemselves. But worse, we have entirely respectable and eminent figures in the'establishment' mouthing utter rubbish about 'root causes'.

I recall the first time I heard about 'root causes' in Punjab was not duringthe course or peak of terrorism, but after the scourge had been defeated. Alearned professor at one of Delhi's most renowned universities (part of thatrenown is now tainted with notoriety because of the proximity of many of itsluminaries to Left-wing Extremism in India and Nepal) where I was speaking,interjected with a question regarding the 'root causes' and the neglect of the'people's demands', which had led to terrorism. I asked him what these demandsand root causes were in Punjab, one of the India's most affluent states, and howthey had been addressed - since terrorism had ended now. Having 'studied' thesubject from a safe distance he obviously had no idea and sought to wriggle outof the discussion by saying I should know what these demands and causes were.But I knew of no 'root causes' in the Punjab, and no justifiable demands thatcould explain the slaughter of innocents.

I know only of the limitless ambition and corruption of politicians whosought to harness religion and religious identity to grab power through massmurder. And I know that the problem of terrorism in Punjab was resolved by thethousands of unsung heroes in the state who stood together to crush theterrorists.

These included not only the police, the paramilitaries and the Army, but alsomany local politicians who stood on a common stage, at great personal risk. Inthe initial phases, when they held meetings in the villages, people were afraidto come out; but slowly they responded, as sheer courage and determination wonthem over. These leaders included people from all the major political partiesoperating in Punjab, who overcame their partisan antipathies and agendas tospeak with one voice on an issue of national security.

The understanding that is necessary can come from painful experience, or itcan come from due diligence. Realising that there was a crisis of comprehensionin the country, I started the Institute for Conflict Management nine years ago,and it has put into the open source a vast quantity of data, information andanalysis that can allow any person with a reasonable intelligence and educationto gain an understanding of terrorism, its threats and what needs to be done. Itis crucial that those who are concerned about terrorism, arm themselves withthis information and bring their own perspectives on the subject into greaterconformity with the objective realities of the ground. It is only after suchawareness is widely shared by and disseminated through the general public thatit can begin to exert pressure on the political establishment, and the media andthe public intellectuals have a natural and necessary role in this process.

K.P.S.Gill is former director-general of police, Punjab. He is alsoPublisher, SAIR and President, Institute for Conflict Management. This articlewas first published in The Pioneer.