India has witnessed acts of terror in the past but the attacks at ten places in its financial capital, Mumbai, on November 26 have a sinister message for the country and the world.
If in the past terrorists carried explosives hidden in lunch boxes, pressure cookers or on bicycles, the Mumbai attacks were carried out by well-trained perpetrators — men in their early twenties wielding modern automatic weapons and hand grenades.
Another message the militants have sent India and the world is that their targets would no longer be only heavily-guarded government buildings and landmarks that symbolise a nation’s power and glory but also “soft targets” such as deluxe hotels, clubs and cafés frequented by Westerners.
The ease with which “India’s 9/11”, as the Mumbai attacks are being called, was carried out suggested meticulous planning and coordination between the perpetrators and the conspirators.
It also reflected the dismal failure of India’s intelligence agencies, which could not identify the attackers and their background even on the day after the attack.
Western intelligence experts said Deccan Mujahideen, the outfit which the militants claimed to represent, was unknown and may have been used as a front by other extremists groups.
Deccan, an Anglicised form of “dakkhin”, which means south, refers to the Deccan Plateau that covers most of southern India.
Security expert Peter Bergen said the manner in which the militants carried out the attacks suggested they had strong links with Pakistan-based outfits, even though the perpetrators could have been disgruntled Indian Muslims.
Bergen found it strange that the terrorists did not clearly articulate any specific demands, except remind the public of the plight of Muslims in India and make a vague call for the release of imprisoned jihadis.
Terrorists usually announce their agenda and make specific demands when they carry out their operations.
Motive: derailing peace
Bergen also offered another theory in an interview on CNN: The attacks may have been aimed at sabotaging the peace process between India and Pakistan.
Al Qaida, whose activists American forces are vigorously hunting down in Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province, may be trying to shift the pressure from itself and distract its American and Pakistani pursuers by creating a conflict between India and Pakistan.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, in his address to the nation, blamed “forces outside this country”, alluding to Pakistan, for the attacks.
“The well-planned and orchestrated attacks were intended to create a sense of panic by choosing high-profile targets and indiscriminately killing innocent foreigners,” Singh said.
Though India does not want a derailment of the peace process with Pakistan, the Indian government will find it extremely difficult to ignore these attacks, particularly with the general elections likely next year, when the Singh government completes its five-year term.
The government’s popularity among Indians, particularly the business community, has sharply declined.
The business class sees the Congress-led coalition government as incapable or unwilling to curb terrorism.
Security experts around the world are trying to piece together the Mumbai puzzle and figure out who was behind the terrorists.
While the involvement of some elements within Pakistan’s intelligence agency, Inter Services Intelligence, or ISI, cannot be ruled out, some experts believe the Deccan Mujahideen could be a cover for another group or a name adopted just for the Mumbai attacks.
Some Indian experts believe the Deccan Mujahideen may have links with the Indian Mujahideen which has carried out the bombings in the country in the past.
This theory gains credence given the reason that the group had sent an e-mail to Indian newspapers on September 15 threatening to carry out “deadly attacks” in Mumbai.
Also, Western experts are unsure whether the attacks had any links with Al Qaida. Experts at the Research And Development Corporation (RAND) in the United States argue that the attacks did not carry the hallmarks of Al Qaida, which generally uses suicide bombers and not hand grenades.
The modus operandi of the Mumbai attackers was different from that of Al Qaida operatives.
Also, the terrorists were well trained in the use of automatic rifles and grenades. Sources, including M.L. Kumawat, the special secretary in India’s Home Ministry, suggest the attackers may have had ties with the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a disbanded militant group allegedly supported by the ISI to wage a war against India in Kashmir.
The LeT, some experts say, may be “outsourcing” terrorism to Indian Muslim operators.
Old hands at troublemaking
The group in the past claimed responsibility for several attacks on Indian troops and civilians in recent years and is suspected of having a hand in the bomb blasts that ripped through Mumbai’s packed commuter trains and railway platforms during rush hour in July 2006, killing more than 200 people.
Despite the LeT’s denial, experts are examining whether the outfit played any role in the Mumbai attacks.
In his latest book The Search for Al Qaeda, Bruce Riedel, an adviser on South Asian affairs to US President-elect Barack Obama, says Osama Bin Laden, together with the ISI, was responsible for the creation of LeT in the late 1980s to end Indian rule in Kashmir.
The US State Department says the LeT has several thousand members in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir and calls it one of the three largest and best-trained groups fighting against India.
However, some US experts do not rule out that India’s Muslims may have, on their own, carried out the attacks in retribution for the killings of Muslims in the 2002 riots in Gujarat, the poor treatment of Muslims in India and the community’s economic backwardness.
Hindus account for about 80 per cent of India’s population of nearly 1.15 billion whereas Muslims comprise only 13.4 per cent.
According to a report published by the National Counter-terrorism Centre in Washington last year, 3,674 people were killed in terrorist attacks between January 2004 and March 2007, which was second only to the toll in Iraq in the same period.
Fishing in troubled waters
In the middle of the mayhem wreaked by the terrorists, India’s political parties are looking at opportunities to profile themselves as best-suited to tackle terrorism.
The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has been calling for a revival of a tougher anti-terrorism law, which had been in place during its rule but was quashed by the Manmohan Singh government.
A government panel has also proposed a tougher anti-terrorism law similar to the old law.
However, Congress representatives such as Kapil Sibal, a member of the Manmohan Singh Cabinet, argued that the existing laws, under which suspects can be held for up to 90 days without formal charges, were tougher than the Patriot Act in the US.
The BJP has been attacking the government for being “soft” on terrorism.
The acts of violence have rattled so many Indians that they would be happy to give their votes to any party that can effectively crack down on terrorist violence.
The BJP has conceived a “Save India” campaign, which Arun Jaitley, the party strategist, says is a response to the deteriorating security situation.
According to Jaitley, fighting terrorism will be a key issue on which the BJP will contest the next elections.
Although most of the victims of the Mumbai attacks were Indians, Western countries were disturbed by the fact that the terrorists went about systematically searching for Americans, Britons and Jews among their hostages.
Mumbai has witnessed terror strikes in the past but this is the first time militants have specifically targeted Westerners.
Also, the use of the sea by the perpetrators to get to Mumbai has exposed a major deficiency in India’s security which experts will now try to close.
The British authorities, meanwhile, are trying to find out if any Briton of Pakistani origin was involved in the attacks.
Britain’s security services estimate that hundreds of young British-born Pakistanis have travelled to Afghanistan and Pakistan in the past decade to attend militant training camps.
West’s reaction
Western countries were among the first to call Indian politicians to express their solidarity and deep concern for their nationals in India.
The White House and the US State Department condemned the attacks in the strongest terms.
“The United States condemns this terrorist attack and we will continue to stand with the people of India in this time of tragedy,” Dana Perino, the White House press secretary said.
A team of FBI experts will study forensic material and monitor the situation closely.
Pressure on the Indian government from within the country to intensify cooperation with the FBI in combating terrorism will increase in the days ahead, although an information-sharing mechanism is already in place.
Obama, aware of the foreign policy implications of the attacks, quickly issued a statement in which he strongly condemned them and emphasised that the “United States must continue to strengthen our partnerships with India and nations around the world to root out and destroy terrorist networks”.
For Obama Mumbai has already become his first major foreign policy test even before his installation as US president.
The period of transition from the exit of the old administration and the arrival of the new one is very long. The new president will be inaugurated next January 20.
Washington hopes the attacks will not derail the détente process under way between India and Pakistan.
That could happen if, as Singh said, Pakistan’s involvement is clearly established.
Singh will face tremendous domestic pressure to put Pakistan under the scanner and denials by Pakistan will not cool tempers in India.
There is such fierce anger and resentment among Indians against Pakistan that it could easily dislodge Singh if he does not take a tough stand backed by action against terrorism.
Mayhem is the cover
Should India-Pakistan relations sour, the attackers will have achieved their immediate goal and made the task of the US administration, including that of Obama, to hunt down Al Qaida and the Taliban even more difficult.
Obama will, consequently, put massive pressure on Pakistan to stop terrorist acts against India originating from its soil and concentrate on putting an end to the proliferation of militancy in Pakistan’s lawless tribal regions, which have become the breeding ground for terrorism.
Getting Osama Bin Laden and his men is a top priority for Obama, who will call for Pakistan’s undivided attention to achieve this.
There is also speculation in Washington that Obama’s administration may appoint a special envoy to “facilitate” — India is allergic to the term “mediate” — a settlement on Kashmir between India and Pakistan.
Going by its past reaction to these proposals, India is unlikely to agree to such an offer since it regards Kashmir an “internal matter”.
There is fear of a Hindu backlash against Muslims in the wake of the attacks. Such a reaction would distract Washington’s plans to go after Bin Laden.
Deepak Chopra, a US-based physician, philosopher, writer and television commentator on current affairs, emphasised the urgency of containing terrorism and advised keeping a watch on the situation in Mumbai because it could inflame to “proportions that we cannot even imagine”.
“One of the things I think is happening is that these terrorist groups are actually terrified that Obama’s gestures to the rest of the Muslim world may turn the tables on them by alienating them from the rest of the Muslim world. So they’re reacting in this manner,” Chopra said on CNN.
He also warned against “going after the wrong people, as we (the US) did after 9/11, because then the whole collateral damage that occurs actually aggravates the situation.
Because if you go after the wrong people, you convert moderates into extremists.
It happens every time and retribution against innocent people just because they have the same religion actually aggravates and perpetuates the problem.
“In India, this is particularly inflammatory because there is an increase in Hindu fundamentalism.
We saw what that did in Gujarat where there was almost a genocide of the Muslims.”
There are about 150 million Muslims in India, higher than the number in Pakistan.
“This is an opportunity for India and Pakistan to recognise [terrorism as] their common problem.
It is not a Muslim problem; it is a global problem,” Chopra said, urging Pakistan to cooperate with India in uprooting terrorism.
“It’s not enough for Pakistan to condemn it.” Pakistan will need to dismantle and eradicate the terrorist outfits that are active in that country.
Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari has been reconciliatory in his approach to India and is trying to foster closer ties.
With Pakistan’s trade and industry severely hit by the global financial crisis, Zardari wants greater trade ties with India.
He stunned the Pakistani military establishment by openly suggesting a “no first” nuclear strike deal with India and even proposed the denuclearisation of South Asia.
Terrorism also has the potential to cause irreparable damage to India’s economy.
The world watched in horror the images of one of India’s finest landmarks, the Taj Mahal hotel, going up in flames during the attacks and the hostage rescue operations.
India’s reputation as an attractive investment destination could be destroyed if it fails to contain terrorism.
India’s tourism industry, facing a downturn as a result of the financial crisis that caused a 20 per cent drop in business, has now given up hopes for a revival.
Cancellation of visits by tourists, particularly Westerners, following the violence were almost immediate.
On lookout for a saviour
Rajinder Pal, the president of the Travel Agents Association of India, described the present situation in the tourism industry as a “major crisis”.
Industry, fearing the devastating impact of the attacks on business, has urged the government to take strict action against terrorism.
“We do not want a repetition of the all-too-familiar blame game and hollow platitudes recited by politicians, who are incompetent and try to make terrorism look harmless because of minority votes,” a Mumbai-based industrialist insisting on anonymity because of “business sensitivities”, told Weekend Review in a telephone conversation.
India’s institutions, he warned, would “easily crumble” in the face of terrorist attacks.
Rajeev Chandrasekhar, president of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, called for stringent laws to deal with terrorists.
“It is time we all joined this debate on terrorism and demanded a stronger and firmer leadership and approach, including better laws, to this threat,” he said.
Manik Mehta is a commentator on Asian affairs.
Trail of gore and fear
In recent years, India has witnessed a growing number of attacks against civilians.
Most have involved indiscriminate bombings in public places, unlike the coordinated armed assault on multiple sites in Mumbai, formerly known as Bombay, that began on November 26.
- March 13, 2003: A bomb attack on a commuter train in Mumbai kills 11 people. Indian authorities blame Lashkar-e-Taiba, a network of extremists. An alleged accomplice dies in a shootout.
- August 25, 2003: Two bombs hidden in taxis kill about 60 in Mumbai at the Gateway of India and at the Zaveri Bazaar.
- August 15, 2004: A bomb explodes in the northeastern state of Assam, killing 16 people, mostly schoolchildren.
- October 29, 2005: Sixty-six people are killed when three blasts rip through New Delhi’s Sarojini Nagar market, which was busy before a Hindu festival.
A caller from the Front for Islamic Uprising, a group linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba, claims responsibility.
- March 7, 2006: At least 15 people are killed in three blasts in the Hindu pilgrimage city of Varanasi. Recent arrests have revealed the role of Indian Mujahideen.
- July 11, 2006: More than 180 people are killed in seven bomb explosions at railway stations and on trains in Mumbai.
Indian officials initially blamed Lashkar-e-Taiba but recent local arrests suggest that the Indian Mujahideen was involved.
- September 8, 2006: At least 32 people are killed in a series of explosions, including one near a mosque, in Malegaon town, about 250 kilometres northeast of Mumbai.
- February 19, 2007: Two bombs explode aboard a train heading from India to Pakistan; at least 68 passengers, most of them Pakistanis, burn to death. The bombs were kept in briefcases and placed on the floor of the train.
- May 18, 2007: A bomb explodes during Friday prayers at a historic mosque in the South Indian city of Hyderabad, killing 11.
Police later shoot five people in clashes with enraged Muslims protesting the attack.
- August 25, 2007: Three coordinated explosions at an amusement park and a street stall in Hyderabad kill at least 40 people. Authorities said recent arrests and confessions have pointed to the Indian Mujahideen.
- May 13, 2008: Seven bombs rip through the crowded streets of the western Indian city of Jaipur, killing at least 63 people in markets and outside Hindu temples.
The bombs are carried on bicycles, in cloth bags hanging from their handlebars.
- July 25: Eight bombs explode in Bangalore. One woman is killed.
- July 26: Sixteen bombs explode in Ahmedabad, killing 45. Indian Mujahideen claims responsibility for the attack and the May 13 attack in Jaipur.
- September 13: At least five bombs explode in crowded markets and streets in the heart of New Delhi, killing 23 people. Indian Mujahideen claims responsibility.
Two suspected bombers are killed in a shootout when police raid a hideout associated with the group.
- October 30: At least 83 people are killed in 11 serial blasts in Assam.
Authorities blame local militant group United Liberation Front of Asom, acting with help from Bangladesh’s outlawed Harkat-ul-Jehadi-al-Islami.
