After Sydney and Peshawar, there is a buzz in government about a policy to deal with a potential hostage situation. The main point coming through — as reported in this newspaper on Wednesday — seems to be a concern with formulating a standard operating procedure.
This is where the problem lies, for men in uniform already have a well laid out drill. However, adherence to it is frequently a casualty, as Maoist incidents in Chhattisgarh underline. What’s wanting is discipline, and training upgrade.
If terrorists overwhelm a school or a public place and take hostages, the local police will be the first to respond. They are a state’s jurisdiction. Skilling them is the first task. In Sydney, it was the police that acted. In India, a federal force could be sent out if the magnitude of the crisis warrants it. In that event, coordination with the local police becomes crucial.
This is an important but overlooked command and leadership issue. There is little point bringing the national security adviser into the picture, as seems to be the temptation. The NSA must not get operational, even if he is a former policeman.
Some leading nations say they don’t negotiate with terrorists, but this is followed mainly in the breach as contacts are often maintained in secret. It may be best to remain flexible and not lay down a firm, official line. Also, real time intelligence-sharing between the Centre and the states is a prime necessity. In the UPA period, the Opposition had prevented legislation on this.
