| ||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Issue 11 Vol I, March 15, 2006 comment How Not to Fight Terrorism
On 4th March 2006, several former Punjab militants nonchalantly reaffirmed their stand on Khalistan on a TV news Channel. Jagjit Singh Chauhan made three points in support of his claim. First, they would achieve Khalistan by 2007, second, they would achieve their objective with the support of their associates in USA & Europe and three, and Kashmir would get its independence before that. Luckily, the people of Punjab who had undergone immeasurable suffering during decade and a half-long terrorism reacted strongly exposing the absurdity. The Akali leadership has gone with the popular opinion. Government too did act after initial wavering. Blasts in Varanasi heightened the dangers of any laxity. It is necessary to refresh the collective memory of the nation regarding the strategy of the neighbouring country that had offered the sanctuary to the militants now seeking to revive the memories of the tormented times. Pakistan got a great opportunity to subvert and arm the Sikh youth when they went to that country under pressure from the armed forces during Operation Wood Rose the army launched in 1985 to track down the suspected Sikh youth after Operation Blue Star. The relationship flourished further after the successful Operation Black Thunder in 1988 that seriously upset the Pak designs in disrupting the peace and harmony in Punjab and rest of the country. Pakistan intensified training of the Sikh youth and induction of free weapons across the border before the fence was erected. At this juncture a major strategy was framed under which the Punjab Militants fighting for Khalistan were to act in coordination with Kashmiri militants. The Pak ISI clearly told them that the route to Khalistan lay through Kashmir. In clear terms they were to get Khalistan after Kashmir became independent. This is what the much-brainwashed Jagjit Singh Chauhan who was President of the Council of Khalistan, was hinting at. When Punjab militants enjoying the warm hospitality of Pakistan failed to fulfill their promises of achieving their objective with the active support for them in Punjab and other countries, they were heaped with indignities and humiliation by the ISI. They left Pakistan as by that time they found climate in their home state of Punjab quite inviting. Pakistan had forged a joint platform for the Punjab and Kashmir militants under the name of KKI (Khalistan & Kashmir International) after 1990. This front remained active but the security forces foiled all their designs. Frustrated ISI then, made desperate efforts to involve Indian minorities as the third component of the plank. There were massive efforts to destabilise the entire country. When they failed to carry out their mission with the help of Indian co-religionists, they inducted the Jehadi groups from their country and outside. Terrorist actions at Raghunath temple in Jammu, Akshar Dham in Ahmedabad and Sankat Mochan in Varanasi are part of that strategy. Pak-returned militants now wanting to revive militancy were part of it. Their motives and the timing of these statements merit a detailed enquiry by the security agencies. It is evident that the once-active militants still suffer from the long- term effects of the sustained brainwashing by the ISI. They are parroting the words that were driven into their psyche during their long stay in Pakistan. They may be attempting belatedly to placate the anger of ISI by asserting that they are still committed to promises made to them. Their ill-timed statements may be feebly directed towards those from whom they had swindled huge funds for attaining the mirage of Khalistan. They can also be seen to make vain attempt to mollify the sentiments of the families of thousands of impressionable youth whom they had misguided on the path of death and destruction. They may be testing the waters under the new political dispensation. They may be exposing the state of morale of the security forces. They may be attempting to do all. Reports in the media indicate that the government action is delayed and partial. Action seems to have been facilitated by the public outcry and the tragic reminder by the Varanasi Bomb blasts. The history of the growth of terrorism in Punjab shows that the governments in the state and at the center were not foresighted enough to nip the evil in the bud. If they had done that lives of 20,000 persons who lost their lives during the heyday of terrorism could have been saved. Instead they played games and indulged in costly experiments. Political parties in general have never shown commitment to combat terrorism as a national imperative. National interests are inevitably sacrificed at the altar of expediency of partisan politics. Fractious and squabbling parties have not been able to arrive at any consensus on tackling the problem of terrorism that seeks to threaten country’s security and integrity. They failed to give meaningful direction to the state machinery to make effective use of the existing and newly enacted special laws in dealing with terrorism. Under the much-maligned TADA designed to deal with terrorism, some 18,000 cases were registered of which about 10,000 were sent to court. Minor punishments were awarded in less than 300 cases, under provisions of the Arms Act. Terrorism is now a global phenomenon. We can learn from the examples of others. In a recent briefing to the Federal Security men Putin, the Russian President urged them to eliminate terrorists like rats after hunting them out from their dens and caves. He reminded them that they had a task to protect the society. Who of our political leaders, except Sardar Beant Singh, martyred Chief Minister of Punjab, had such courage to speak with clarity and determination on vital issues concerning national security? This is despite the fact we have suffered the most and the longest at the hands of externally aided terrorism. They do indulge in hollow rhetoric that does no good to the morale of the security forces. If Russia is under a different regime, Indian leadership can take a cue from USA, a country with strong democratic traditions that had no hesitation in erecting effective laws to tackle terrorism under the dignified name of Patriotism Laws. We also have a model in the oldest democracy, the UK, where stiff anti-terrorist laws have been enacted. It is time for an appraisal of our thinking and approach to national problem. | ||||||||||||||||||
|
SOUTH
ASIA POST INC. |
||||||||||||||||||
T