Westminster attack, some lessons

Arun Joshi

It is naïve to believe that the terror attack at Westminster, London, on March 22 was a typical one. This attack stands out as an act of individual with his tools being a car and knife at one of the most protected places in the British capital. Although automobiles and knives have been used by terrorists in Israel, Belgium and France, the attention that this one drew because it happened at Westminster – the seat of British Parliament – was unprecedented.

This attack was an innovation in terrorism. It was an assault was an attempt at a high value target, and the results for the attacker Khalid Masood, must have been an accomplishment that could inspire the terrorists in waiting.

Scotland Yard has not been able to find out what sent Khalid Masood on such a mission. Since it was an act of terror by Khalid Masood – a Muslim - the speculation was concluded as an evidence that he might have acted under the influence of Al-Qaida or ISIS. All this was empirical. As of today, the investigations are inconclusive, or it may be said, at the dead-end. The truth may never be known. But the very choice of the target and the method used in the assault leaves no one in doubt that it was a 100 per cent terror attack.

But the way it happened is a new challenge for the global security agencies to find, why it happened and what was the motivation. The whole conclusion that it was a lone wolf attack by a British-born Muslim inspired by ISIS is a blindfolding the truth. Such flawed investigations and conclusions muddle the atmosphere and spoil the community relationships.

The attack would add a new sense of accomplishment among the terror groups and their sympathisers all over. Simply because Khalid Masood did it, other citizens become suspicious of the community to which he belonged. Next-door suspicion sweeps within the community, but that vanishes when the tag of potential terrorists is flagged for the community. The psyche of the attacker and victim starts spinning off real and imagined tales. Many of which are bizarre but give credence to Samuel Huntington’s theory of Clash of Civilizations. That brings in the cycle of more violence and acts of terrorism.

There is a sense of accomplishment among the terrorism inspired men and women that how easy it is to challenge the powerful people at the most powerful and protected places.

Knife as a weapon has been used with lethal consequences in the Kashmir valley as well. A number of policemen were stabbed to death and their weapons snatched by unsuspecting individuals in 2015 and 2016. This commonality straddles across the continents. But the two situations are never the same. Kashmir is reeling under armed militancy for the past three decades. In London, there is no such thing at the moment after the Good Friday (April 10 , 1998) agreement between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. In Britain, now it is imported “jihad” via Al-Qaida and the immigrants and their British-born offsprings. The western way of dealing with terrorism is different. No questions would be raised the way the police there would deal with Khalid Masood’s family or his associates, or, for that matter his community members. There is a sense of racism in the global community in dealing with terrorism. Within Asia, particularly India, the investigations and naming of terrorists and action tracking their roots flashes as a case of grave human rights violations. The global human rights watch groups would hang the security forces even before proven guilty of any excesses.

The real task is to involve the Muslim community as equals and respect their way of living and religious practices. No one should be able to dictate the life of the people if it is within law. Muslims should not suffer any sense of discrimination at any level. There should be a sense of accommodation. It requires a sustained effort to undo the wrongs of the past and prevent recurrence in future. The Westminster attack is a point to reflect all this.