Terrorism on the agenda

Although terrorism and Pakistan were already on the agenda of the US-India strategic dialogue in New Delhi during US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s two-day visit to India that began Tuesday, the subject assumes greater significance after the July 13 bomb blasts in Mumbai.

Though Indian investigators have not linked Pakistan to the Mumbai blasts, Pakistan will figure in the US-India talks “in a big way”, foreign affairs pundits in Washington say.

Clinton, who last visited India in July 2009, is accompanied by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and a high-profile business delegation. Commercial interests will also take her to Chennai where Ford operates an automobile plant. This is the first major exchange after President Barack Obama’s historic India visit in November 2010.

Clinton will also, of course, discuss India’s entry into important multilateral regimes to control the spread of weapons of mass destruction as embodied in the Nuclear Suppliers Group. The Wassenar Arrangement, the Australia Group and the Missile Control Treaty Regime will figure as much in the talks as cyber security, new ground where India and the US will tango together.

The strategic dialogue is structured to intensify bilateral relations in five major areas such as defence (including counter-terrorism); energy and climate; economics, trade and agriculture; science, technology, health and innovation; and education, development and empowerment.

However, the big question that stares at both sides is how to deal with Pakistan, a state that is spinning out of control. Moreover, India has been unable to control the outbursts of terrorist violence on its soil, and the latest Mumbai blasts merely underscore this inability.

Though US interest in India is, apparently, driven by self-interest, India could also learn from America’s no-nonsense, preventive crackdown on potential terrorist threats, an approach that has nipped in the bud any potential terrorist violence on American soil.

Poor governance

Indian politicians “talk too much and do very little”, as many complain. The latest Mumbai blasts have eroded Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s credibility, with doubts being raised about his resolve to curb the terrorism scourge that can destroy India’s wealth-creating beehives. Singh had vowed to prevent another attack after the Mumbai terrorist attacks of November 2008; this resolve was belied by the July 13 attacks in Mumbai.

There is no iron-clad unity amongst Indian politicians against terrorism. Each politician plays to his vote-bank gallery, ignoring the broad national interest and sounding more like apologists for terrorists. India needs unity in demonstrating zero tolerance, as the US has done, against terrorism.

Indian politicians indulge in finger pointing after every incident: while the ruling Congress party’s reaction is characterised by confusion and platitudes after every incident, the opposition BJP offers little by way of tangible solutions besides harping on the government’s abysmal failure.

India’s media waxes eloquently about the country’s resilience in the face of terror, forgetting that those surviving the bomb attacks have no choice but to go back to earning their daily bread.

And consider this hypocrisy: the Indian government spends millions on providing protection for even obscure politicians – the thought that the social status of a politician can be enhanced by the size of the army of bodyguards protecting him, is ludicrous and comical – but fails to protect the masses in a city that produces a large chunk of India’s wealth.

Of course, America’s interests are commercial; it wants to sell to India — from products through services to technologies that will aid in fighting terrorism.

However, India also needs to become self-reliant and think out of the box to fight terrorism. Indian politicians, who have done very little to prevent terrorism, should place the emphasis on preventing terrorism rather than merely reacting to it.

While seeking US assistance to fight terrorism, India can initiate a few things to tackle the scourge. An aggressive, pro-active intelligence work is needed. It would also help if India’s police and security agencies won the confidence of the minorities and impressed upon them that terrorism was giving them and their religion a bad name.

The large majority of India’s Muslims are patriotic and law-abiding citizens who see their future in India and not in Pakistan which many Indian Muslims consider a failed state. India’s Muslims, if taken into confidence, can provide invaluable intelligence support in fighting the scourge that is tarnishing their image and violating the peaceful tenets of their religion.

Manik Mehta is a commentator on Asian affairs.