Mumbai Siege Leaves Carnage on Human, Political, Diplomatic Levels
 Printer-friendly
|
 Email article |
Related subjects: Anjika Sridhar, Asia / Pacific, Diplomacy & Politics, India, Pakistan, Security & Surveillance Comments Off
For days, news reports heralded the end of the Mumbai siege, though it continued, with fierce gunbattles and intermittent explosions, amid a raging inferno, at the Taj Mahal Palace hotel. There was death and destruction at no less than 9 separate locations in what some headlines termed “the battle for Mumbai”. Diplomatic tensions were high throughout, as foreign governments sought to ensure the safety of their citizens. The dead were of many distinct nationalities, including highly publicized French, American and Israeli victims.
Israel offered elite commando assistance to rescue hostages at a Jewish outreach center, where ultimately 5 Israelis were killed. Pakistan has been vocally and repeatedly accused by Indian authorities as somehow involved, with the suggestion being made overtly that the government of Pakistan tolerates militant groups known to be planning such massacres. Pakistan denies the charges, and says it will cooperate fully to stamp out violent radicalism and the US is reportedly contemplating sending a special envoy to tamp down tensions between the nuclear-armed neighbors.
At least two top security officials —Home Minister Shivraj Patil and national security adviser MK Narayanan— have resigned, as a result of the attacks, amid criticism the government did not adequately respond to warnings about potential terrorist plots. CafeSentido reported earlier today that:
US intelligence officials warned Indian authorities that hotels in Mumbai and possibly Delhi could come under attack. Local security officials in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh also reportedly warned Indian officials that hotels in Mumbai could come under attack [with other reports suggesting] an intelligence warning was given to Indian authorities that they should be prepared sometime this fall for “an attack from the sea”…
[ad#cafsen-intext]
Indian tycoon Ratan Tata —chairman of the Tata Group and owner of the Taj Mahal Palace hotel— said on Fareed Zakaria’s Global Public Square (CNN) that he fully intends to restore or rebuild the Taj to its former glory, to show that “We will not be defeated”. The hotel was severely burned out, with images showing only charred remains of the lavish landmark. Yesterday, one witness told the BBC that the carnage was unbearable to observe, with dead bodies “totally roasted” by the inferno.
The attacks are a severe moment of reckoning for India, as it will now have to grapple, more than ever, with the question of how to build and stimulate civil society, in the world’s largest open democracy, while actively working to clamp down on militant groups and perhaps, as has been suggested in this case, highly-trained sleeper-cell organizations, preparing for future operations. The situation also poses a serious test to India’s political integrity: will it be able to get the cooperation it needs from Pakistan’s government and avoid an escalation in tensions with its old foe?
One disturbing analysis, by Richard Miller, suggests that fourth generation warfare (4GW) —the sporadic ongoing struggle against violent international “networks” of militants— may be reaching a phase of aiming for “soft targets”. This could pose a serious threat to the viability of Indian democracy, in that the nation of more than 1.1 billion inhabitants is rife with densely populated sites where the comprehensive “hardening” of locations, in security terminology, would be nearly impossible.
Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said his government was not involved. “If they have evidence, they should share it with us. Our hands are clean,” he said at a news conference in Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital. “We have nothing to be ashamed of.”
Pakistan warned that it would redeploy troops involved in the terrorism fight on its border with Afghanistan to its frontier with India in response to any Indian troop movements.
The most haunting speculation comes from analysts who intuit a link between radical Islamist groups, possibly based across the border in Pakistan, whose aim might be to provoke a bloody war between the two hugely populous nations, in order to destabilize one or both political systems. Pakistan is engaged in an increasingly intense struggle to suppress violent fundamentalism within its borders, and the two enemy states may now find themselves looking at the need to establish serious, viable, open and long-running cooperative institutions that will allow them to reduce this threat for their mutual benefit.
With estimates of the death toll running from 173 to 195, and some reports suggesting there are more victims yet to be located or identified, the security mess, including political fallout and an impassioned diplomatic back-and-forth, could also be an opportunity to bring to light many of the mechanisms by which the two rival states could establish a cooperative framework for peace and security.
| Printer-friendly
|
Email article |
CafeSentido Partner Sites: