West Bengal at risk of jihadi extremism. Mamata must help Bangladesh fight terror

It is in India’s own national security interest that it should extend all possible aid to prime minister Sheikh Hasina.

COLONEL R HARIHARAN  @COLHARI2 POLITICS |  6-minute read |   18-01-2016

Most Bangladeshis would welcome the Supreme Court’s confirmation of death sentence awarded to Motiur Rahman Nizami, Ameer of Bangladesh’s largest Islamic fundamentalist party Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) for leading the Al Badr Bahini to carry out the massacre of innocent civilians and other crimes in collusion with Pakistan army during the liberation war in 1971. Those of us who took part in the war and witnessed the gruesome tragedy would also welcome it.

On November 21, 2015, two other collaborators - Salauddin Quader Chowdhury and Ali Ahsan Mohammed Mojaheed, JI General Secretary - were executed after the Supreme Court rejected their appeal against a Chittagong special court that sentenced them to death for acts of genocide and murder in Chittagong in 1971.

It had not been an easy task for her to prosecute the collaborators of Pakistan army, particularly after Major General Ziaur Rahman seized power after the founding father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who started their prosecution, was assassinated on August 15, 1975.

Zia not only stalled the prosecution of collaborators, but also lifted restrictions on collaborators like Nizami to return to Bangladesh in 1975. Though fundamentalist parties like JI commanded less than ten percent votes, they wielded a strong influence over sections of conservative Muslims. Zia’s intention was to muster their support for the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) to counter the huge popularity the Awami League (AL) enjoyed.

It was an anachronism that for political gains, Zia, who led his Bengal Regiment battalion to join the fight for freedom against Pakistan army, chose to ignore the crime of collaborators who carried out systematic genocide of two to three million innocent civilians and raped an estimated 2,00,000 women, mostly Hindus. We had seen at first hand the traumatic effects of the massacres when we marched into Dhaka.

I still remember the chilling sight of a grinning human skeleton hung at the entrance of the Al Badr interrogation centre in Mohammedpur, a posh suburb of Dhaka, when we went there after the battle to collect evidence of war crimes. We also met many families of intellectuals killed by the militia. A doctor from Tangail recounted his brush with death at the hands of the militia and the Pakistan army when he and over 60 other intelligentsia of the town were lined up and shot dead. Luckily, others who fell dead upon the doctor saved him from the bullets!

Scores of young Hindu women came in palkis and met us in Cox’s Bazar (in the Southeast tip of Bangladesh) when I stayed on to carry out counter insurgency operations in Chittagong. They tearfully recounted the atrocities they were subjected to, including rape, at the hands of lumpen militia elements during the war.

Begum Khaleda Zia, who came to power after Zia’s assassination, accommodated fundamentalist parties including the JI in the BNP’s ruling coalition and legitimised the role of collaborators like Nizami in mainstream politics. He used the opportunity to emerge as an influential member of the coalition cabinet from 2001 to 2006.

It was not surprising that during this phase, fundamentalist extremism was unofficially encouraged and the JMB extremists grew bolder and bigger. Initially, the Khaleda government chose to ignore their violent activities. However, when the JMB elements attacked NGOs, the government bowed to public pressure and banned the organisation in 2005.

The government action was apparently half-hearted thanks to fundamentalist elements within the coalition like Nizami. The JMB sent a strong message against the ban when it exploded 500 bombs in 300 locations across the country. Though JMB leaders have been prosecuted and executed and the organisation suppressed, there are indications the sleeper cells of JMB are still active in Bangladesh and would stage a comeback.

Similarly, the case of an extremist grenade attack on an Awami League rally on August 21, 2004 killing 21 people was investigated and seriously taken up for prosecution only when Hasina came to power. Fifty two people are facing prosecution for their involvement in the attack. They include Khaleda’s son and senior BNP vice chairman Tarique Rahman now in exile, former state minister for home Babar, former political secretary to Khaleda Zia Haris Chowdhury and JI secretary general Mojaheed. They are believed to have conspired with a leader of Harkat Ul Jihad Al Islami Bangladesh (HUJIB) - the Bangladesh affiliate of the notorious Pakistani terrorist outfit (HUJI) - to carry out the attack.

Of special interest to India is the role of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Bangladesh during Khaleda’s rule. It became active in Bangladesh arming Indian insurgent groups like the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) that had taken refuge there.

At that time Bangladesh’s intelligence agencies like the Directorate General of Federal Security Intelligence (DGFSI) and National Security Intelligence (NSI) also helped the ISI in these efforts indicating official approval of the action. This came to light when ten trucks carrying a huge cache of arms and ammunition enough to arm a brigade of troops were found at the Chittagong port in April 2004. The arms cache destined for delivery to ULFA included 4,930 assorted firearms, 840 rocket launchers, 300 rockets, 27,020, 2,000 grenade launchers and 11.4 million bullets!

However, serious investigation of the case and prosecution of the culprits was taken up only when Sheikh Hasina came to power. A Chittagong special court convicted 14 persons including Nizami (a minister in 2004), Lutfozzaman Babar of BNP (state minister for home in 2004); the then director of the DGFI and the director of NSI were sentenced to death for their role in this case.

Fortunately, both India and Bangladesh are now actively sharing information on terrorists operating on both sides of the border and coordinating their actions. This was evidenced by the return of ULFA leader Paresh Barua (also sentenced to death in the arms smuggling case) to India which augurs well to end insurgency in Northeast. 

It is in India’s own national security interest that it should extend all possible aid to prime minister Sheikh Hasina to help her succeed in her relentless efforts to eliminate the patrons of jihadi extremism embedded in the body politics of Bangladesh.

Recently, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) has unearthed an extensive support network of the JMB in West Bengal while probing the October 2, 2014 accidental blast in Burdwan district. The fact that they could infiltrate and establish their foothold across the border in India speaks poorly of state’s role in tightening its set up to fight jihadi extremism. The NIA has now slapped charges against 28 persons, including a key member of JMB Nurul Hoque alias Naeem for “waging war against Bangladesh.”

The West Bengal government should do more to tighten its security apparatus. Often, local political considerations seem to be overtaking national security concerns during follow up action on reports of jihadi extremist activity. The state runs the risk of becoming a hotbed of jihadi extremism to the detriment of the national security of not only India, but also Bangladesh. And with the Islamic State increasingly taking interest in Bangladesh and the JMB extremists trying to stage a comeback, there is no time to lose.

#Terrorism, #Bangladesh War, #Islamic State

[Col Hariharan, a retired officer of the Intelligence Corps, is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia Analysis Group. E-mail: haridirect@gmail.com. Blog: http://col.hariharan.info.]

Courtesy: India Today Opinion portal DailyO              http://www.dailyo.in/politics/islamic-state-isi-pakistan-bangladesh-jamaat-e-islami-terrror-awami-league-bengal-mamata-banerjee/story/1/8521.html

Sri Lanka’s unbalanced 2015 scorecard

Col R Hariharan

The year 2015 would go down in Sri Lanka’s history as one of the most eventful years. It saw the fall of the two-term president Mahinda Rajapaksa; the man  who vanquished Prabhakaran and the LTTE in the Eelam War in 2009 could not overcome the most unlikely political duo - Rajapaksa’s close aide and Sri Lanka Freedom Party(SLFP)’s senior leader Maithripala Sirisena and the opposition United National Party’s veteran leader Ranil Wickremesinghe.

They teamed up to strategise the defeat of Rajapaksa twice: first in the presidential race and then in the general election when Rajapaksa tried to bounce back into national reckoning. 

It would be facile to dismiss the Maithripala-Ranil (M&R) combine’s victory as Rajapaksa’s own making. The duo had strategized Rajapaksa’s defeat with an attractive game plan that had widespread appeal particularly for the sections marginalized by Rajapaksa. So it was no wonder that they ganged up not merely to defeat Rajapaksa but reform governance and accountability all round.

The game plan had an ambitious 100-day agenda ranging from electoral reforms to restructuring the presidential system, improving law and order, toning up the sagging economy, cull endemic corruption and last but not least bring to book Rajapaksas and their cronies for alleged misdeeds including corruption and misuse of office.

Tamil and Muslim minorities joined by liberal sections of society and working class voted in large numbers to dethrone Rajapaksa. This has exploded the myth of Sinhala Buddhist right wing dictating the political fortunes in Sri Lanka elections. Of course, the Sinhala Buddhist loyalists probably voted en masse (around 48 percent votes) to support Rajapaksa. But the whole conduct of violence-free elections and the seamless change of guard at Temple Trees thereafter belied predictions of chaos and mayhem that would follow with the exit of Rajapaksa. This gives hopes for Sri Lanka democracy; despite its warts it is safe and functional in the hands of the people.

But that may not be enough; peoples’ expectations from the M&R government are very high. How did it fair in 2015 would be a pertinent question. Of course, it would not be fair to answer the question as the government has not completed even one whole year in office. In any case, many key initiatives continue to be works in progress or thoughts in contemplation.

But its 2015 performance scorecard gives a fair idea of things done and not done. It also indicates the priorities for 2016.

M&R strategy

The Mahinda-Ranil duo’s power sharing appears to be far from a marriage of convenience; despite the lure of office and power, they have managed to keep their party flocks to work together to run a national unity government. It is to their credit that they managed to do this despite repeated attempts by their own ambitious party leaders and rank and file to retard the process.

On the flip side there is a jumbo cabinet of over 100 assorted ministers, reminiscent of Rajapaksa days. Bloated ministries seem to have come to stay in the nation of jumbos setting an unhealthy precedent for the future. Bloated bodies take time to translate thought into action; so it is not surprising there is more talk than action and result on some of the key issues. This situation is unlikely to improve as the ruling coalition parties with disparate agendas seem to be interested in pulling down each other in the power play rather than unite to speed up the reform process.

Structural reforms

After resorting to band aid enactments to change the electoral system, prune the powers of executive president to improvehis accountability to parliament, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe has taken up the complex task of drafting a new constitution. According to him it would address the three issues of devolution, electoral system and alternative to the executive presidency.

Leaders of parties in parliament have been consulted and provision is being made to receive the views of the people. However, the two major parties - the UNP and SLFP – have strong conceptual differences on core issues due to internal and external compulsions which could delay a consensus on the form and content of the new constitution. Similarly, the contentious issue of devolution of powers which triggers strong ethnic and religious sentiments could prove problematic.

Minority issues

Though it is nearly three decades since Tamil separatist insurgency ended its bitter memories continue to haunt all sections of society. Rajapaksa’s political expedience of keeping the bogey of revival of Tamil Tiger terrorism to further his constituency  rather than speeding up the healing process sustained suspicion and friction between the estranged communities. Similarly, LTTE’s overseas remnants trying to keep the embers of separatism played upon by sections of Tamil polity on both sides of the Palk Strait to serve their interests gave credence to Rajapaksa’s Tamil Eelam bogey.

This attitude seemed to have conditioned Rajapaksa government’s approach to handling a whole range of issues relating to Tamil minority. These range from rehabilitation to human rights violations including alleged war crimes, custodial killings, disappearances and  stalling of the dialogue process with the Tamil polity.

On the other hand M&R regime has shown greater sensitivity to Tamil grievances. It acknowledged these shortcomings and has tried to remove minor pinpricks that had irritated the Northern Provincial council government for long. It has attempted to introduce greater transparency into the investigative process. For instance the UN Human Rights Investigation report on alleged war crimes as well as the reports of the Udalagama that and the Paranagama commissions were placed before the parliament. The Udalagama commission investigated 15 incidents of alleged serious violations of human rights since August 1, 2005; the Paranagama commission inquired into allegations Sri Lanka army’s war crimes and called for an independent judicial investigation into them. But further follow up action on the findings is slow in coming.

However, some of the other major grievances remain unattended. For instance, even after six years since the war ended, 12000 families are in make shift arrangement in Jaffna as their lands have not been released by the army. Over 250 former LTTE members are still rotting in jails without trial not unlike the American incarceration of Taliban extremists in Guantanamo Bay for over a decade and a half.  And the government decision to resort to domestic inquiry to look into war crimes allegations continues to remain a contentious issue among Tamils.

No progress has been made in devolving powers to Tamils; it is likely to be further delayed as it is likely to be subsumed in the new constitution making process.  However,  gestures like replacing the governor of Northern Province who was a retired general with a more acceptable candidate and making  the TNA leader P Sampanthan leader of the opposition in parliament shows the government is not averse to incremental improvement in the situation.  The government efforts to reach out to the Tamil Diaspora to participate in developing war affected areas appear to have had some success.

Foreign relations

A special effort has been made to repair the fractured relations with the US and the West. Its success was seen in their mellowed approach in the UN Human Rights Council when Sri Lanka war crimes issue came up for discussion. The government has also taken corrective action in response to India’s security concerns over the increasing tilt in Sri Lanka policies in favour of China adopted during the Rajapaksa days. At the same time, the government had been careful in maintaining an even handed attitude to China particularly as it has emerged as the biggest investor.

The government’s visible action to improve its human rights record in response to EU concerns in the past, have increased the chances of it regaining the GSP+ duty concessions for its exports to the EU.

Economic recovery

In keeping with the UNP’s strong commitment to economic and social sector reforms, deregulation and private sector development, the government’s economic policy is to be based on social market economy. This marks a departure from President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s model which halted the privatization process and launched several new companies and grandiose projects under the state.

In keeping with the policy, the budget 2016 aims at achieving two quantitative targets: reduce the high budget deficit to 3.5 per cent by 2020 and transform the tax structure which is skewed towards indirect tax to reduce its contribution from 80 per cent of the revenue to 60 per cent and increase direct taxes contribution from 20 per cent to 40 per cent.  The moot point is can Sri Lanka achieve these ambitious economic objectives?  

It is not going to be easy as Sri Lanka is heavily dependent upon external resources. Foreign resources will only flow only if investor confidence is improved. Only sustained structural reform process can tone up the system. Public expenditure needs to be disciplined and endemic corruption has to be tamed.  Can this government do it?

Anti corruption drive

There had been only limited success into alleged cases of massive corruption. Though inquiries into misuse of power and corruption have continued into various allegations ranging from mega projects to money laundering started during the Rajapaksa days, the government has not been able to find clinching evidence to take legal action against the Rajapaksas. Even the reopened investigations into the murders of the rugby player Thajudeen and cartoonist Prageeth Eknaligoda have not been able to decisively link them to the Rajapaksas. Perhaps the government is wary of applying too much pressure on the former president for fear of strong backlash from his party loyalists both within and outside the government. These investigations could continue in the better part of 2016 to bring them to a logical closure.

Conclusion

It is commendable the Maithripala-Ranil duo have managed to cruise through the troubled political waters to achieve some success. However, they need to speed up the momentum of reforms. The acid test is going to the drafting of a new constitution to meet the aspirations of the people who voted them to power. And it is not going to be easy to evolve a consensus through conflicting pulls and pressures. We may see more and more of it in 2016.

Sri Lanka’s economy is heavily dependent upon the international scene likely to continue to be precariously perched between the desire for development and the burden of debt servicing. This balancing exercise is likely to continue in 2016. Sri Lanka can take some consolation that it enjoys greater goodwill than Rajapaksa ever did. That could come in handy in times of economic crisis..

Overall, the government seems to have scored an unviable 4.5 in a scale of 9 for performance in 2015. It will have to speed up its systems and ponderous bureaucracy to clock better results in 2016. There is no other option lest it squanders public confidence reposed in them. 

Written on December 31, 2015

Courtesy: South Asia Security Trends, January 2015 issue

www.security-risks.com

[Col R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence specialist on South Asia, served with the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka as Head of Intelligence 1987-90. He is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia Analysis Group. E-Mail:haridirect@gmail.com  Blog: http://col.hariharan.info]

Sri Lanka perspectives: November 2015

Col R Hariharan

Sri Lanka economic policy

In keeping with the United National Party (UNP)’s strong commitment to economic and social sector reforms, deregulation and private sector development, Prime Minister Ranil’s Wickremesinghe presented in parliament his government’s economic policy based on social market economy. This marks a departure from President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s model which halted the privatization process and launched several new companies and grandiose projects under the state.

This was to be achieved through an export-oriented model to be followed for the next five years. Strategies proposed to be adopted include turning Colombo into a financial hub, the creation of a mega city in the Western province on the lines of Singapore and Dubai, creation of sector-specialized technology, business and development of tourism zones across the country.

In keeping with the economic policy, the budget 2016 aims at achieving two quantitative targets: reduce the high budget deficit to 3.5 per cent by 2020 and transform the tax structure which is skewed towards indirect tax to reduce its contribution from 80 per cent of the revenue to 60 per cent and increase direct taxes contribution from 20 per cent to 40 per cent. It also would like to reduce loss making state enterprises and set up a pension fund for social security, improve investment climate through low tax regimes and land ownership and protection of business, and improve tourism, infrastructure and public services

The moot point is can Sri Lanka achieve these ambitious economic objectives?  It is not going to be easy for Sri Lanka to enforce its economic strategy as it is heavily dependent upon external resources. Foreign resources will only flow only if investor confidence is improved. Only sustained structural reform process can tone up the system. Public expenditure needs to be disciplined despite political compulsions and endemic corruption has to be tamed.  This might look a tough prescription given

​ the​

 past experience; but Sri Lankans need to be optimistic about the future given their strong basics: geographic advantages of location, ocean resources and sustained human resource development than other nations of the region.

Sri Lanka has already made some progress in recouping international goodwill lost due to Rajapaksa government’s to negative response to global concerns on its poor human rights, unchecked aberrations of governance and endemic corruption. But this is only the beginning of the process.

On the human rights front Sri Lanka has tried to tackle the issue on through multiple initiatives. It managed to convince the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) members of its sincerity in addressing their concerns by sponsoring the resolution on a domestic investigation into the rights violations with an international component.

It has tried to defuse the atmosphere of fear and confrontation that had existed in Northern Province though the progress is slow. For example, unlike the earlier years after the Eelam War, Tamil families who had lost their kin in the Eelam War were allowed to mourn on November 27 LTTE’s Martyrs Day and chose to play it down.

The government has tried to introduce greater transparency in governance. For instance it has published detailed reports of inquiry commissions appointed to investigate allegations of enforced disappearances as well as war crimes committed by both sides during Eelam War.

But the weakest link in governance appears to be corruption. Despite public pronouncements against corruption, sloppy progress in some of the serious corruption investigations has given rise to suspicion of intentional delay to save some political elements within the government. Typical is the ‘floating armoury’ case in which former defence secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa was suspected to be involved. The case related allegations of money laundering, gun running and corruption in the operations of Avant Garde Maritime Services (AGML), which operated two ships MV Avant Garde and MV Mahanuwara as floating armoury for depositing weapons of private security personnel on piracy protection duties aboard merchant vessels. When allegations of gun running cropped up both the ships were searched on shore and there were discrepancies in their weapon inventories. The whole investigation started in March 2015 has been marred by contradictory stands of the Navy and the CID and the concerned ministers.  In the latest twist when MV Avant Garde was searched by Navy on the orders of the President in October 2015, again there were discrepancies in accounting for the 817 weapons found on board. And the merry go round continues.

Ban on Tamil Diaspora bodies lifted

The government has lifted the ban on several of the 15 Tamil Diaspora bodies, which were suspected of links with the LTTE and banned by the Rajapaksa regime. The organizations on which the ban was repealed included the Global Tamil Forum (GTF), the British Tamil Forum (BTF), Australian Tamil Congress (ATC) and the Canadian Tamil Congress (CTC) among others. The government order also lifted the ban on the head of the Global Tamil Forum, Father SJ Emmanuel who left the country in 1997.

The lifting of the ban is part  the Sirisena government move for rapprochement with Tamil Diaspora groups for their positive contribution  to the reconciliation process with Tamil minority.  Earlier this year, Foreign Minister MangalaSamaraweera had talks with the GTF in London. Representatives of the Tamil National Alliance and former Norwegian peace envoy Erik Solheim also attended the talks.

However, the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE), the post war overseas clone of the LTTE, and its leader and former LTTE attorney V Rudrakumaran continue to be among the proscribed organizations and individuals.  This was not unexpected as creation of an independent Eelam State continues to be the objective of the TGTE. 

The lifting of the ban is a positive step that would be welcomed by India as it would encourage the process of bringing back Tamils into national mainstream.

Written on November 30​, 2015

[Col R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence specialist on South Asia, served with the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka as Head of Intelligence 1987-90. He is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia Analysis Group. E-Mail:haridirect@gmail.com  Blog: http://col.hariharan.info]

 Courtesy: South Asia Security Trends, December 2015 www.security-risks.com

Pathankot attack: Enduring macros

COLONEL  R HARIHARAN  @colhari2  POLITICS  | 7-minute read | 12-01-2016

There is a feeling of déjà vu when we look at our response to the Pathankot attack. There was the same confusion in command and control, poor response to warning of a terrorist attack, abysmal physical security measures (even in the airbase close to the Pakistan border where terrorists freely circulate), leadership without responsibility, incoherent public communication and political one-upmanship between the state and the Centre as we saw after Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorists carried out the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai.

There was timely dissemination of intelligence about an impending terrorist attack. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, fortunately, kept mum and didn't utter the usual “we will not be intimidated by terrorist attacks” statement, sparing the nation this embarrassing cliché, unlike his predecessors.

The Opposition castigated Modi though they knew the prime minister never made a statement when everyone expected him to do so. Modi, in fact, struck to his schedule and spoke about yoga!

However, there was a curious difference in the way the Pathankot attack was handled. In a first, National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval took charge of strategising and controlling the counter-terror operation from New Delhi in the early stage itself, though the operation was inside an important military airbase!

One may call it the Doval gambit as the NSA seems to have used it an opportunity to pin down Pakistan prime minister Nawaz Sharif and make him take follow-up action and bring the Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorists to book as a tangible proof of his sincerity in mending ties with India. The NSA saved Sharif’s face by not calling in the army to carry out the operation which could have provoked the Pakistani army to retaliate.

Hats off to the NSA; apparently he convinced the three service chiefs to be party to his decision; otherwise it is difficult to understand them agreeing to hand over the operation to the National Security Guard (NSG) commandos even before the first shot was fired (NSG arrived at the scene even before the operation started according to Punjab Police).

The Army was available in the near vicinity of Pathakot and counter-terror operations are its bread and butter. They had been conducting such operations the region for more than four decades. I am confident there exists in the airforce base a standard operative procedure for joint operations with the Army to handle such a threat. So the NSG was flown into the airbase and the results are there to see.

What is disturbing is the national mindset that seems to be the driving force in this country in matters military. During the last three decades or so, the services seem to have been trained to say “ji huzur” to politicians and bureaucrats even on matters of national security rather than take decision and act with responsibility in keeping with their professional training.

To set the record straight, our service chiefs also seem to have become accustomed to this state of affairs for many years now. They are wise men. They have seen an irrepressible Army chief running the risk of being hauled up had he moved two regiments of armour for training in the national capital region without "permission" from the defence ministry (or informing the then minister Manish Tiwari even though he had nothing to with defence ministry). The chief could have been accused of plotting a coup!

The latest demonstration of this mindset is in the sixth pay commission’s draft recommendations. It equates a trained soldier with the lowest rung of untrained civilian staff, well below the policeman, in dishing out largesse.

Coming back to Pathankot airbase attack, nobody seems to believe the apologetic defence minister Manohar Parikkar’s claim that the operation was a success. He only saw some “security related gaps that will be cleared after investigation”. It is the understatement of the year so far!

But if we go by the minister’s body language, he himself probably did not believe it. His discomfort is understandable. After all, the airbase - a prime airforce installation close to the Pakistan border - had advance warning of a possible terrorist attack; yet the six terrorists managed to not only enter the airbase but strike at a time of their choosing and inflict casualties. They managed to stretch the operation for over three days. Probably that is why Masood Azhar, the Jaish chief, is gloating over the terrorists' success in Pathankot.

Moreover, the defence minister, like the service chiefs, seem to have been on the fringes of the decision-making process in the Pathankot operation. The poor man was left to explain minister for home affairs Rajnath Singh's hasty declaration of complete success even before the terrorists fired the last shot in the operation. Where does the home minister come in a terrorist attack in a military establishment will be an enduring mystery, if we ignore the clear pecking order even in case of a counter-terror operation inside a military installation.

The other enduring mystery is the security of airbases. In 1963, I found the same weaknesses in Tezpur as in Pathankot – floodlights of the perimeter not working, heavy uncleared underbrush within the airbase that provides hiding space for intruders and poorly maintained border fencing. The Pathankot airbase seems to be only maintaining this tradition of neglect. The problem is that it was Tezpur way back in 1963. Now it is 2015.

Pakistan has become the world capital for an alphabet soup of jihadi terrorist outfits. Jihadis regularly infiltrate into Jammu and Kashmir to create trouble. They do this also in the south across the India-Pakistan border in Punjab through which drugs, fake currency and humans are also regularly trafficked.

And as I grow older, I discover some things never change in this country. There was a lot of lightning and thunder when we made a mess of handling the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai. The UPA's man of action P Chidambaram took over as home minister and swore to rework the whole national counter-terror response system.

He used to submit progress reports regularly to Parliament. But the whole issue faded from the political discourse, public mind and national mainstream. Now he is only lamenting about things he failed to do.

We are back to where we started; cacophony in parliament has overtaken action on national priorities including security threats. So like the child widows of rural West Bengal who loudly voice their woes in village temples in the evenings, we will start our lament all over again when another big bang Pakistani terrorist attack overwhelms us.

We can only wish good luck to the NSA in his new gambit; but I am not prepared to bet on his success because some things never change in Pakistan also. It seems to be our mirror image in its laid back attitude towards result-oriented action.

Lastly, my heart goes out to the Defence Security Corps personnel - the re-employed defence pensioners who had the thankless task of fighting the terrorists. They were never meant to do this. In the Pathankot operation they showed that grey hair and stooped backs notwithstanding, they are no less than their serving peers. They sacrificed their lives without even collecting their One Rank One Pension (or not true OROP) dues which are yet to be notified, just as many of their fellow pensioners are doing.

I hope their widows at least collect their dues in their lifetime. As 19th century poet Arthur Hugh Clough said, “If hopes are dupes fears may be liars.” So servicemen continue to live on hope; what else they have? Enduring macros never change in this country; so we plod on.

[Col Hariharan, a retired officer of the Intelligence Corps, is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies and the South Asia Analysis Group. E-mail: haridirect@gmail.com. Blog: http://col.hariharan.info.]

Courtesy: India Today opinion portal DailyO http://www.dailyo.in/politics/pathankot-terror-attack-pakistan-narendra-modi-ajit-doval-nawaz-sharif-nsa-terrorism-jihad/story/1/8416.html