War on Mumbai-3

Few lessons from the deadly terrorist attack.

After the horrific terror attacks on Mumbai that were carried out over a period of three days, one was captured alive, Mohammed Ajmal Kasab. He is been treated in the prison like a princes and his demands too are increasing with each passing day. Right from Kababs, to writing a letter, to a perfume, free walking space and many others. What can be interpreted from these? I can only interpret that Indian laws are too lenient that we all are allowing such things happen and the trial of the terrorist is a joke now.

The brazenness of the incident combined with its potential to destabilize the region already has the counter terrorism world searching for lessons learned. Few have emerged.

The public expects competent law enforcement: By any measure, India’s response to the crisis has been underwhelming. Initial news reports suggested that some armed police officers hid rather than shoot at the attackers as they fired into crowds of bystanders. Others were simply outgunned. Meanwhile, the country's elite counterterrorism unit took some 10 hours to attack hostage-holding militants because Mumbai, a city of 13 million, has no SWAT-type group capable of fighting back.

The country's top security official, Home Minister Shivraj Patil, had already tendered his resignation. The prime minister, meanwhile, promised to overhaul the country's counter terrorism capabilities and create four more hubs for the elite response unit, which he did fulfill. But, in fairness to the Indian security forces, several security experts say that even an American city faced with simultaneous attacks at a rail station, major hotel, tourist hub, and religious center would be hard pressed to muster enough commandos.

Low-tech attacks can do tremendous damage. The attack itself appears to have required little specialized knowledge from the attackers. Automatic rifles and hand grenades appear to have done the most damage. Ten guys with guns and hand grenades in shopping malls in 10 different cities—or even spread out in one city—could bring this country to a standstill.

Terrorists can influence elections. From Madrid to Iraq to Pakistan, the fact that major terrorist incidents occur around elections is no coincidence. One particularly poignant half-page newspaper ad from an opposition party features a blood-stained wall and the words "Weak Government." Pakistan is no stranger to election terrorism. Candidate Benazir Bhutto was killed by terrorists during a heated election campaign against former President Pervez Musharraf.

The cure may be more deadly than the disease. India and Pakistan, the nuclear-armed neighbors have fought three wars and been close to several more. The last major military escalation came in 2001, when terrorists attacked the Indian Parliament, killing 15. (The Indian government also laid blame for that incident at the feet of LET.) The group's involvement in the Mumbai attacks could endanger recent cooperation between the nations, which in turn could complicate efforts against al Qaeda in the tribal regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan, U.S. official’s fear.

"There are larger goals here, namely the hope that an attack against India would end intelligence sharing and cooperation in the region and allow [LET] and other terrorist groups, including al Qaeda, greater freedom to operate," says one U.S. military intelligence official. "These were very public, televised attacks designed to force the Indian people to demand a response from their government. Sometimes the response is more important than the actual attack."

Despite promises of reform, don't expect systemic change. In the past year, India has experienced a dramatic upsurge in terrorism. Cities including Bangalore, Jaipur, Ahmedabad, and New Delhi have been on the receiving end of terrorist attacks.

Happy Independence Day!!

Jai Hind!!

Source: CNN-IBN and US News Week