Military & Aerospace

How Pakistan's Proxy War Began - IX
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
By B Raman

Wake-up call

The Day of Infamy in New York and Washington DC on September 11 is a wake-up call for all nations grappling with the menace of externally-directed terrorism. More so for India.

Also read: How Pakistan’s Proxy War Began – I

Security agencies all over the world had been concerned since the middle 1990s over the possibility of the following three potentially catastrophic future scenarios, which they call new or catastrophic terrorism:

Click to buy: A Terrorist State as a Frontline Ally

  • First, the use of or threat to use weapons of mass disruption (eg a computet virus) to damage or destroy the national security, economic, communications, energy and other vital supplies’ infrastructures.
  • Second, the use of or threat to use weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.
  • Third, seizing control of sensitive installations such as nuclear reactors and using them as bargaining chips to force the State to concede their demands.

Terrorist networks of today are becoming increasingly autonomous in their functioning with their dependence on their State-sponsors reduced by the easy availability of narcotics dollars and weapons and explosives, which they can buy from the flourishing smugglers market with narcotics money.

These concerns were the outcome of the Sarin gas attack by the Om Shinrikiyo sect in Tokyo in 1995 and subsequent interviews given by Osama bin Laden in which he had expressed an interest in the procurement of weapons of mass destruction, particularly chemical weapons.

However, none of the scenarios discussed in the past had visualised the type of horrendous attacks mounted by the terrorists on September 11. But irrational and fanatical minds think alike. A Sikh terrorist arrested in the early 1990s had stated that Pakistan’s ISI had suggested to the terrorists the possibility of crashing a plane into the Mumbai High platform. Mumbai – March, 1993, was the seed from which New York and Washington DC – 2001 was born.

In the third and final part of its report on National Security during the 21st Century released in February, 2001, a bipartisan Commission led by former US Senators Warren B Rudman and Gary Hart had called for the creation of a Cabinet-level agency to assume responsibility for defending the US against the increasing likelihood of terrorist attacks in the country. The report warned that terrorists probably will attack the US with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons at some point within the next 25 years.

The Commission proposed a complete redesign of the National Guard to provide a new “Homeland Security Agency” with US-based troops to combat those who threatened the US within its territory. It outlined a far-reaching reorganisation of the Pentagon, the State Department, the National Security Council and other agencies, saying that they had become bloated and unfocused. Its report even urged Congress to streamline its own committee structure to keep interference in national security matters to the minimum necessary.

Deaths are no longer counted in dozens, but in thousands. Old crisis management drills evolved to meet conventional threats such as hijacking, hostage-taking, etc, will no longer meet the horrendous threats of today.

The Commission recommended merging the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Customs Service, the Border Patrol and the Coast Guard into the new “Homeland Security Agency.” It said that the National Guard should be “reorganised, properly trained and adequately equipped” to cope with natural disasters and attacks on US targets by weapons of mass destruction. The Commission said that the National Guard should be relieved of the responsibility of participating in overseas deployments and concentrate on security at home.

The report added: “The combination of unconventional weapons proliferation with the persistence of international terrorism will end the relative invulnerability of the US homeland to catastrophic attack. A direct attack against American citizens on American soil is likely over the next quarter century. The risk is not only death and destruction but also a demoralisation that could undermine US global leadership. In the face of this threat, our nation has no coherent or integrated governmental structures.”

US Congressmen have attributed the failure of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to give advance warnings of the September 11 attacks to its over-focus on technical intelligence (TECHINT) to the detriment of human intelligence (HUMINT). The catastrophic terrorist groups of today, exemplified by the AI Qaida of bin Laden, do not always use modern technologies. For the World Trade Centre bombing in February, 1993, and for the bombings in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam in August, 1998, his supporters did not use modern explosives. They used, instead, a large quantity of nitrate fertilisers, which anybody can buy in the market without creating suspicion.

They stick to old communication technologies to avoid detection. Ever since the US bombing of \his training camps in Afghanistan in August 1998, bin Laden has been largely using couriers and avoiding the use of his mobile (satellite) phone lest the Cruise missiles zero in on the phone.

Editor’s Pick

Unless the HUMINT capability is stepped up, advance warnings of such catastrophic terrorist acts is going to be increasingly difficult. Like the CIA, the Indian Intelligence Community has also been strong in TECHINT, but weak in HUMINT. Unless this is set right, our preventive capability would be weak.

Catastrophic terrorism demands a multi-agency approach, with all counter-terrorism divisions of various agencies working under a common roof, under common leadership, with a common national purpose. This came into force in other countries many years ago. India has only just now woken up to the need for it.

The networking of the terrorists has not been matched by a networking of the victim-States. There has been a mushrooming of intelligence-sharing mechanisms, but without visible improvement in the ground situation.

Deaths are no longer counted in dozens, but in thousands. Old crisis management drills evolved to meet conventional threats such as hijacking, hostage-taking, etc, will no longer meet the horrendous threats of today.

India’s crisis management was found wanting even during the classic lAC hijacking of December, 1999. Does our security bureaucracy have the capability to prevent catastrophic terrorism and deal competently with the catastrophe, if its preventive mechanism fails? This is a question, which needs urgent attention.

Terrorist networks of today are becoming increasingly autonomous in their functioning with their dependence on their State-sponsors reduced by the easy availability of narcotics dollars and weapons and explosives, which they can buy from the flourishing smugglers’ market with narcotics money.

The non-State actor terrorists of today tend to group together in united fronts in order to assist each other in their operations. Bin Laden’s International Islamic Front for Jehad against the US and Israel brings together nearly a dozen Islamic terrorist organisations of different countries.

Terrorism is an absolute evil and has to be treated as such.

Under such circumstances, a counter proxy war strategy by India has to be directed not only against a State-sponsor such as Pakistan, but also against the various non-State actors operating from Pakistani territory, who may not be totally under its control.

The networking of the terrorists has not been matched by a networking of the victim-States. There has been a mushrooming of intelligence-sharing mechanisms, but without visible improvement in the ground situation.

Book_a_terrorist_stateAn equally important factor has been the lack of a lucid analysis of the dimensions of the new menace and the absence of a political will to strike. One hopes that the present will to take up the challenge posed by the terrorists would not be weakened after some time due to political considerations, as often happens. Terrorism is an absolute evil and has to be treated as such.

Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

B Raman

Former, Director, Institute for Topical Studies, Chennai & Additional Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat. He is the author of The Kaoboys of R&AW, A Terrorist State as a Frontline Ally,  INTELLIGENCE, PAST, PRESENT & FUTUREMumbai 26/11: A Day of Infamy and Terrorism: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow.

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left