The recently-held conference of the police chiefs of the country in Guwahati was a bit of disappointment considering the expectations generated by the Modi government. Threats were identified, but there was no indication of how these are going to be tackled. In his speech, Union home minister Rajnath Singh expressed concern over the formation of a unit of Al Qaeda in India and took cognisance of a small section of the youth being influenced by the ideology of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, but he had no roadmap for dealing with these challenges.
He acknowledged that the Maoist problem persists in 10 states, but had no strategic plan to deal with it. All he had to say was that the government is ready to talk to the Maoists provided they eschew violence. Ironically, immediately after the conference, the Maoists struck in Sukma district of Chhattisgarh, killing 14 CRPF personnel, including two officers. The incident was almost waiting to happen with government dithering on the internal security front. There is no fresh initiative, let alone any comprehensive plan, to deal with what has been described as the “greatest internal security challenge.”
One wonders what is in store on the terror front. The Institute for Economics and Peace, an independent think tank, recently published the Global Terrorism Index, analysing the impact of terrorism in 162 countries around the world, covering 99.6 per cent of the world’s population. According to the report, the maximum casualties (82 per cent) had taken place in five countries — Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria and Syria — and that the most lethal terrorist groups are the Taliban, Boko Haram, ISIS and Al Qaeda.
Apart from these five, which constitute almost a war zone, India is one of the worst-affected countries by the scourge of terrorism. According to the institute, there was 70 per cent increase in terror incidents in India in 2013 as compared to 2012, with the number of deaths going up from 238 to 404. The number of attacks also increased, with 55 more attacks in 2013 compared to 2012. A total of 43 different terrorist groups were identified as being responsible for these attacks.
Historically, terrorist incidents started in India in 1954, when Angami Zapu Phizo started what he called the “Hongkin government” in the Naga Hills and there were incidents of loot, arson, murder and attacks on police posts. The sparks in due course flew to Mizoram, Manipur and Tripura. ULFA (United Liberation Front of Asom) was formed in 1979 to liberate Assam “from the Indian colonial regime”. The late Sixties saw the beginnings of the Naxalite movement which has since spread to large areas of central India. The Eighties witnessed a fierce terrorist movement in Punjab which led to Operation Bluestar. The Nineties marked the beginning of insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir with terrorist outfits from across the border fishing in the Valley’s troubled waters.
It would not be wrong to say that we have been experiencing different shades of terrorism for the last 60 years. And it is a sad comment on our handling of terrorism that the arc of violence has continued to spread over the decades across the country.
This is, however, not to say that we did not achieve any success on the terror front. In fact, there are four success stories the country could be proud of. In Punjab, one of the most lethal manifestations of terrorism was vanquished. In Andhra Pradesh, the Greyhounds, an elite commando force, achieved signal success against the Naxalites and was able to flush them out of their stronghold in Telangana area. In Tripura, the tribals had risen in revolt when they found their ethnic identity being overwhelmed by immigrants from Bangladesh.
The insurgency was contained by the state police through well-orchestrated operations. The Terai area of Uttar Pradesh was also witness to terrorism in the late Eighties. Though it was essentially a spill over of the terrorist movement in Punjab, it was nevertheless quite serious and had spread over a geographical area larger than that of Punjab. Here also, the state police stamped out terrorism through comprehensive operations.
However, it has to be acknowledged that our counter-terrorism efforts have since slackened and terrorism of different hues is again on the rise. There are indigenous terrorists and there are terrorist outfits from across the western as well as eastern borders trying to politically destabilise and economically devastate the country.
Lashkar-e-Tayyaba is focused on Kashmir, but and its chief, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, unabashedly declared in 2007 that “jihad in Kashmir will end when all the Hindus are destroyed in India”. Al Qaeda has launched a new branch to spread “Islamic rule” and “raise the flag of jihad” across the sub-continent. Pakistan’s Tehrik-e-Taliban plans to extend its operations to India. The ISIS is a distant threat, but its sympathisers have demonstrated their presence in Jammu and Kashmir and Kerala. The recent suicide attack at Wagah border was international terrorism knocking at our frontiers.
The government’s counter-terrorism apparatus needs to be geared up. For this, the state police forces need to be energised. As outlined by the Prime Minister at the conference of DGs and IGs of police, we must have SMART police — strict yet sensitive, modern and mobile, alert and accountable, reliable and responsive, as well as techno-savvy and trained. But the government must understand that there can be no SMART police unless systemic reforms are carried out. These have already been mandated by the Supreme Court and it is a great pity that states are dragging their feet in implementing its directions.
The police must be insulated from extraneous pressures; its manpower must be augmented and infrastructure improved. The intelligence agencies, both in the states as well as at the Centre, need to develop both defensive and offensive capabilities. The National Counter-Terrorism Center (NCTC) should be put in place with suitable modifications in light of the objections raised by the state governments. Government must also spell out its policy of dealing with terrorism and convey, in unmistakable terms, to the sponsoring states that exporting terrorism will be counter-productive.
The writer, a former police chief, was member, National Security Advisory Board
