Tackling terror: Lethargy, laxity on whose part?

Arun Joshi

Many security experts have been scratching their heads and drawing fancy conclusions that Pakistan-based groups attacked the Nagrota army unit on November 28. Sure enough, Pakistan-based groups, whether Jaish-e-Mohammad or Lashkar-e-Toiba, were behind the attack. The style of the attack and the consequences that the attackers left behind pointed towards that only. That is the easiest armchair conclusion from the attack site by the armchair experts, who perhaps visited Kashmir as sponsored tourists at one point or the other.

It was a little surprising when Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar spoke about the scope for improvement in security as some “sort of lethargy” had set in over a period of time. 

Had any of the ordinary mortals suggested that, even remotely, his patriotic credentials would have been shred to pieces. When the truth is spoken, it should be heard. That would help in devising a proper and effective response. So far that has been missing.

Where was the lethargy on the part of the men who fought terrorists at an Army unit in Nagrota, or anywhere else? 

The Nagrota attack told us a story of the absence of some vigil somewhere, especially after the September 18 attack at an Army base in Uri, in which 20 soldiers lost their lives. The commanders hate to listen to the term security lapse. 

The Army can never go wrong anywhere at any point of time.

The laxity lay in the bureaucratic set-up in New Delhi. It did not move at all on a security audit report sent from Jammu and Kashmir. 

The government had sent a report by the Multi-Disciplinary Agency team, constituted on January 15, to undertake a complete security audit of all vital establishments and installations in Jammu and Kashmir. The panel was to complete this task by January 21. And it did meet the deadline.

The reference point was the early January attack at the Air Force base in Pathankot, Punjab, less than 5 km from the 

border of this state as the crow flies.

It was an important decision for multiple reasons: one, it concerned the most sensitive border state in the country battered by Pakistan-sponsored terrorism for over 26 years. This is another matter that former Chief Minister Omar Abdullah squarely blamed New Delhi for creating a political issue in Kashmir by “breaking promises” over decades. According to him, “Pakistan neither invented nor created this issue.” He has taken the reference of the current unrest, but he has ignored how Pakistan hailed militant leader Burhan Wani, who died in an encounter as a “martyr”. A black day was observed there on July 20. Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had described him in his address at the United Nations General Assembly as a “young leader of Kashmir who was brutally murdered by the Indian forces.”

Moreover, Omar contradicted what he had stated at New York University, where he had blamed Pakistan for exporting arms, ammunition and militants into the Indian part of Kashmir.

Secondly, Kashmir has never seen real peace since 1947 – after Pakistan tribesmen invaded the state with clear assistance and support of the Pakistani army. Thirdly, the state has witnessed a series fidayeen attacks on Jammu- Pathankot highway since 2001. Combined with drug trafficking and arms smuggling, the state is faced with multiple challenges.

But the laxity listed in the report was never addressed by the quarters concerned. So why blame lethargy when it comes to Nagrota alone.