Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby RayC » 10 Jan 2009 01:33

KarnaArjuna,

Please read the Geneva Convention and connect.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50398
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby ramana » 10 Jan 2009 02:06

Can the fact that he was 'seaborne' qualify him as pirate and the 'hang them high' prevail?

there must be some convention of piracy.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2260
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Katare » 10 Jan 2009 02:16

He would not qualify for anything unless he was officially on Pakistan's payroll and they accept it. Even if that happens he'll be tried for crimes against humanity and still be hanged.

James B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2249
Joined: 08 Nov 2008 21:23
Location: Samjhautha Express with an IED

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby James B » 10 Jan 2009 03:16

adityaS wrote:
Anujan wrote:
raghunath wrote:Kasab's Defence
Isn't a enemy combatant out of uniform supposed to be a spy anyway, and so not covered by the Geneva Convention? Then again, a versace tee is a fitting uniform for a piglet :mrgreen:


For geneva convention to apply TSPA should agree that they have organized this attack and used Kasab to do this. Will they do?, I don't think so. So, he will be eventually punished by Indian law.

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby sunilUpa » 10 Jan 2009 03:38

RayC wrote:The problem is that the Geneva Convention has not defined what is a terrorist.

Why would Geneva convention apply to him? He is a murderer, prosecute and hang him as per Indian Penal Code.

Why would Geneva convention apply when
1. He is not regular army
2. Wasn't wearing his uniform, or carried papers identifying him as one
3. There is no ongoing war b/w India and Pakistan
4. He killed unarmed civilians.
Last edited by sunilUpa on 10 Jan 2009 03:44, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50398
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby ramana » 10 Jan 2009 03:41

Arent Geneva Convention for soldiers in war? Why is this non-sequitor being discussed over so many posts?

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12913
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby negi » 10 Jan 2009 04:14

I believe we should let the renowned Indian law take its course ; Kasab ain't going no where and given GOI's sense of right and wrong he too will languish in the gallows for rest of his life just like Afzal :rotfl: .

On a positive note Afzal and Ksab won't get to meet their 72 virgins but esteemed company of rats,mosquito's and lice; :mrgreen: more importantly with each passing second they will repent for their actions.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby enqyoob » 10 Jan 2009 05:02

I think Kasab's case will be taken up with all due haste. As soon as the Allahabah High Court disposes of the Babri Masjid case. :roll:

2053, hopefully.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16428
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Rahul M » 10 Jan 2009 05:35

RayC wrote:KarnaArjuna,

Please read the Geneva Convention and connect.

sir, article 4 of the geneva convention makes it quite clear that it DOES NOT apply to people like kasab.

viz.
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.{clearly doesn't apply in this case}

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;{not applicable}

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;{not applicable. unless you consider the saffron thread of hindu-zionists ! :lol: }

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.{the most damning dis-qualifier of them all}


Of course, as ramana ji mentions the biggest dampner in outlook's case for kasab is the fact that in this case NO party is officially in a state of war. :mrgreen:
(cry on each other's shoulders barkha and arundhoti !)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50398
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby ramana » 10 Jan 2009 05:36

From The Telegraph, Kolkota

10 jan., 2009

Indian war game at sea has Pak on guard
SUJAN DUTTA
New Delhi, Jan. 9: Nearly two-thirds of the Indian Navy, including warships, helicopters and a submarine, is at sea for “operations” since the Mumbai attacks in November in which terrorists invaded the country’s financial capital in inflatable rafts and wreaked havoc.

The Indian Navy has about 120 major fighting vessels.


A bulk of India’s warships, many of which have been re-deployed from the east coast to the western seaboard, are currently engaged with the Indian Army and the Indian Air Force in a war game in the Arabian Sea that is testing a new offensive doctrine for amphibious operations. Pakistan is watching this drill with some nervousness since the terror attacks have led to a diplomatic stand-off between the two countries.

The deployment was planned before the Mumbai attacks. But a suspicion that a concentration of forces can flare up into a conflict adds to the tension.

The war game named Triveni is centred on an island in the Lakshadweep and Minicoy group. “About 75 per cent of our major platforms are currently deployed operationally,” a senior navy source said here today. Among these is the INS Jalashwa, the navy’s latest major acquisition, a US-origin landing platform dock that can carry up to 1,000 troops, tanks and other weaponry.

The role of the navy was called to question since the attackers in Mumbai came in from the sea after sailing from Karachi, intelligence reports have said.

But the navy has been staunchly defensive of its role. Its chief, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, had sought to absolve his force of all blame and said it did not get any “actionable intelligence”.

But since the terror attacks, the navy has deployed a bulk of its fighting ships to the western seaboard. Another large ship, a destroyer, is patrolling the Gulf of Aden in anti-piracy operations.

All of Pakistan’s navy is concentrated in the Arabian Sea to India’s west. In an India-Pakistan war scenario, Pakistan fears an attack on its coast by Indian forces. In the 1971 war, the Indian Navy had blockaded Karachi port and bombed the city.

Exercise Triveni, the first of its kind, is expected to be wound up over the weekend after a fortnight in which specialised units of the army practised “amphibious landings” — generally interpreted as an offensive/assault tactic — with the navy and the air force on one or more islands in the Arabian Sea.

Triveni is the first major war game involving all the three armed forces and the coast guard since the adoption of a “Joint Amphibious Warfare Doctrine” by the services in September 2008.

But between 2004 — since the services began working on the doctrine — and 2007, the navy has been engaged in “amphex” (amphibious exercise) scenarios both in in-house drills as well as with mainly western forces. The last drill was named Tropex.


hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3410
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby hnair » 10 Jan 2009 05:39

Aye, his case should not be fast tracked. Infact put kasab in the same cell as that Telgi guy. Matter of time before he fails ELISA/Western blot.

Then onwards, give him only enough anti-retroviral to keep him alive. Once a while he needs to be taken in shackles to the court, so that the Hon Judge can postpone the sitting to the next quarter. And during these sojourns, the press should be present so that pictures of his TFTA face with Kaposi's sarcoma should be made available to the urdu press across border. We should fight with what we have, even if it is an outdated judicial system :evil:

asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby asprinzl » 10 Jan 2009 06:33

Geneva convention my a$$.

In 1971 India had hundreds of rapists and cold blooded murderers in their hand after the Bangladesh war. India could have caused an international spectacle by holding a very public and high profile war crimes hearing. After all genuine and serious war crimes were blatantly committed with conivance of the state. But....but...but...nothing happened.

In 1999 after intruding into Kargil, a few Indian soldiers and at least a pilot was captured alive and murdered. After that the victims' body were gruesomely mutilated. Typical animals of the Islamic mileu. India never bothered to invoke the Geneva convention. Leaders of both nations happily went about in their "lets drink together some tea and chew some paan".

Such is the happy happenings in the late 20th century. The future does not look promising.
Avram

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby vsudhir » 10 Jan 2009 06:38

asprinzl wrote:Geneva convention my a$$.

In 1971 India had hundreds of rapists and cold blooded murderers in their hand after the Bangladesh war. India could have caused an international spectacle by holding a very public and high profile war crimes hearing. After all genuine and serious war crimes were blatantly committed with conivance of the state. But....but...but...nothing happened.

In 1999 after intruding into Kargil, a few Indian soldiers and at least a pilot was captured alive and murdered. After that the victims' body were gruesomely mutilated. Typical animals of the Islamic mileu. India never bothered to invoke the Geneva convention. Leaders of both nations happily went about in their "lets drink together some tea and chew some paan".

Such is the happy happenings in the late 20th century. The future does not look promising.
Avram


Good point.

For better or for worse, the generation that oversaw these lapses will pass into history (or at least retire from public life) in the next few yrs.

Will the next gen be any better? I hope so and do see a few promising stars on the horizon who have ably resisted deracination and do not kowtow to Amrika bahadur, cheen bahadur, tsp baddur and so on. But then, there's the other, larger group that will fight to keep status quo.

Karna_A
BRFite
Posts: 432
Joined: 28 Dec 2008 03:35

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Karna_A » 10 Jan 2009 06:55

And India returned all those 90K people and forgetting it's own officers.
http://www.aiipowmia.com/inter22/in032002paki.html

Again then, Geneva conventions are only for Humans.

asprinzl wrote:Geneva convention my a$$.

In 1971 India had hundreds of rapists and cold blooded murderers in their hand after the Bangladesh war. India could have caused an international spectacle by holding a very public and high profile war crimes hearing. After all genuine and serious war crimes were blatantly committed with conivance of the state. But....but...but...nothing happened.

In 1999 after intruding into Kargil, a few Indian soldiers and at least a pilot was captured alive and murdered. After that the victims' body were gruesomely mutilated. Typical animals of the Islamic mileu. India never bothered to invoke the Geneva convention. Leaders of both nations happily went about in their "lets drink together some tea and chew some paan".

Such is the happy happenings in the late 20th century. The future does not look promising.
Avram

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6113
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Dilbu » 10 Jan 2009 16:51

Ok GOI has shown its response to terrorism. Now it is time to show the response from mango man on the street like me. Phuck job security and phuck global recession, I am going to Desh and vote in this election.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby vsudhir » 10 Jan 2009 16:59

Dilbu wrote:Ok GOI has shown its response to terrorism. Now it is time to show the response from mango man on the street like me. Phuck job security and phuck global recession, I am going to Desh and vote in this election.


Bravo dilbullah. Moi will land in des on r2i a li'l after the polls close, am afraid.

Prabu
BRFite
Posts: 396
Joined: 22 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: In the middle of a Desert

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Prabu » 10 Jan 2009 17:04

So all Pranab is saying is, we are not yet at the end of the road, and still some space is left for diplomacy ! And his hint on "all options are open", says that eventually we will have a surgical strike, if not an all out war !

[url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/no-israel-type-action-against-pakistan-says-india/409174/No Israel type action against Pakistan, says India[/url]

New Delhi: India on Saturday virtually ruled out any Israel type action against Pakistan in the wake of Mumbai Terror attacks, saying the situation is not comparable.

External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee, however, maintained that ‘future course’ will decide how India will deal with Pakistan if the latter does not comply with its demands about ending terrorism.

"I do not agree to that. Because this is totally wrong. The situation is not at all comparable," he said when asked whether Israeli type offensive against Hamas in Gaza Strip could be an option for the Government against Pakistan.

"I have not gone and occupied any of Pakistan's land which Israel has done in Palestine. So, how the situation can be comparable," Mukherjee asked during an interview to a TV channel.

Maintaining that all options are still ‘open’, he said India expects Pakistan to act on the evidence linking elements in the neighbouring country to Mumbai attacks.

"When I say all options are open, all options are open. There is no need of picking up option a, option b, option c, option d. No need of that. I am not responding to that. What I am responding to is options are open," he said.

"We have not reached the end of the road. Pakistan, what they have asked for, we have given them. We expect them to act on it," Mukherjee said.

"If they do not act on it, then what follow up steps we will take and in what space of time it will take place, future course will decide," he said.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby enqyoob » 10 Jan 2009 17:34

eventually we will have a surgical strike, if not an all out war !


Diplomacy: Pranab standing in dilli and saying: :evil: :(( :((

Surgical Strike: Pranab standing at Wagah border and saying :P :(( :((

:mrgreen:

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12858
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Lalmohan » 10 Jan 2009 21:32

asprinzl wrote:Geneva convention my a$$.

In 1971 India had hundreds of rapists and cold blooded murderers in their hand after the Bangladesh war. India could have caused an international spectacle by holding a very public and high profile war crimes hearing. After all genuine and serious war crimes were blatantly committed with conivance of the state. But....but...but...nothing happened.

In 1999 after intruding into Kargil, a few Indian soldiers and at least a pilot was captured alive and murdered. After that the victims' body were gruesomely mutilated. Typical animals of the Islamic mileu. India never bothered to invoke the Geneva convention. Leaders of both nations happily went about in their "lets drink together some tea and chew some paan".

Such is the happy happenings in the late 20th century. The future does not look promising.
Avram


in both cases india was under pressure. in 1971 both the US and China took a very dim view of India actually dismantling the pak military capability and made real threats. thats why the 93,000 rapists had to be freed. that's why the western sector was a containment war... etc., etc.

in time we will hear about the pressure put on us after kargil

Chellaram
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 25
Joined: 21 May 2007 18:42
Location: Houston, Tx

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Chellaram » 10 Jan 2009 22:36

Prabu wrote:"I have not gone and occupied any of Pakistan's land which Israel has done in Palestine. So, how the situation can be comparable," Mukherjee asked during an interview to a TV channel.


:?:

why bring this up and potentially hurt the sentiments of one of your allies? he should have stopped right after he said this:

I do not agree to that. Because this is totally wrong. The situation is not at all comparable...


for being a diplomat, he sure wasnt very composed during this interview :oops:

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby enqyoob » 10 Jan 2009 22:43

The Indian govt keeps exceeding its own idiocy. That comment from Pranab is grounds for IMMEDIATE firing, if the GOI had any class at all. He's totally out of control.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby NRao » 10 Jan 2009 23:03

I think Pranab Da is angling for the next PMship.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9806
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby sum » 10 Jan 2009 23:25

"I have not gone and occupied any of Pakistan's land which Israel has done in Palestine. So, how the situation can be comparable," Mukherjee asked during an interview to a TV channel.

Nice way to say thank you to the country which saved our @$$ during Kargil by ensuring supplies of all possible military equipment (which we were having a shortage of due to our babus)

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby enqyoob » 10 Jan 2009 23:27

The UPA must go.

munna
BRFite
Posts: 1394
Joined: 18 Nov 2007 05:03
Location: Pee Arr Eff's resident Constitution Compliance Strategist (Phd, with upper hand)

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby munna » 10 Jan 2009 23:33

^^It is going! Revolution is coming, I dont want to go into conspiracy theories but apparently there are reports of Bagawat. Elections will tell the correct story, India will repeat 1998 when India broke free from US stranglehold.

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7039
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Muppalla » 11 Jan 2009 01:07

What is the difference between the GOI's strategy and behaviour for Mumbai attacks as compared to earlier attacks. Nothing except for the change of faces. Instead of Patil we are seeing Chidambaram. I was always saying that Patil or no Patil it is not going to change.

His excellency the great great PM of India Shri MMS had made statements like "some neighbouring country", "State players of PAK may have a hand". This idiot is not even honest to say it is Pak that is directly involved. US ambassodor Mulford snubbed the sardar and there is not even a token verbal reaction from the mumblers.

Meanwhile a bunch of US based gora/Indian analysts keep saying that something serious zhapad is already given to TSP. The crowd cheers wah wah wah.

The show goes on...
Last edited by Muppalla on 11 Jan 2009 22:05, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35888
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby SaiK » 11 Jan 2009 01:35

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Why_is_there_so_much_noise_about_Mumbai_Gilani/articleshow/3961353.cms See how many innocent women and children have been killed in Palestine. Why is nobody talking about that? Why is the world silent on that?'' said Gilani


because gaza would not be nuked... and pakistan will be part of silica!! there is a big difference between gaza and mumbai! allah ok bar! kitne bar bar bolun.. pakis are a filthy virus to the world~

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12858
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Lalmohan » 11 Jan 2009 02:01

Chellaram wrote:
Prabu wrote:"I have not gone and occupied any of Pakistan's land which Israel has done in Palestine. So, how the situation can be comparable," Mukherjee asked during an interview to a TV channel.


:?:

why bring this up and potentially hurt the sentiments of one of your allies? he should have stopped right after he said this:

I do not agree to that. Because this is totally wrong. The situation is not at all comparable...


for being a diplomat, he sure wasnt very composed during this interview :oops:


it is a fact that israel has occupied land, even they accept it. focus on the comparison please, thats this point. the pakis are trying to bring gaza up to distract attention, many in the arab world and beyond are horrified by what is happening in gaza. the arab tv stations are showing a lot of blood, gore and dismembered limbs flying around, there is a reaction

asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby asprinzl » 11 Jan 2009 02:23

These same Arabs were celeberating what happened in Bombay especially on Internet forums.
Avram

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12913
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby negi » 11 Jan 2009 02:43

And BRF mods ask us to calm down; Pranab da ekdum sathiya gaye hain(gone insane) , some one tell him he cannot seek US help and criticise Israel in same vein. :evil:

Chandragupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3469
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 15:26
Location: Kingdom of My Fair Lady

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Chandragupta » 11 Jan 2009 02:54

The Congress has always licked the asses of the Arabs, despite India being snubbed every time. The entire Congress leadership should be ashamed of what Pranab Mukherjee has said. A friend like Israel that has backed India every single time deserves to be treated much better.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby enqyoob » 11 Jan 2009 02:58

Pranabda should have someone explain the old saying to him:

Sometimes it is better to keep your mouth shut and let everyone wonder whether you are an idiot, than to open it and remove all doubt


He could have made whatever point he wanted to make without bringing in such comments. Either he needs to be muzzled by the IFS, or the IFS who allowed that comment should be sent as Ambassador to Gaza.

His comments certainly do not represent knowledgeable Indian majority opinion. Just whom is he representing?

Karna_A
BRFite
Posts: 432
Joined: 28 Dec 2008 03:35

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Karna_A » 11 Jan 2009 06:33

There was a time when Pro-Arab/Gulf policy made economic sense(though not strategic) in India. India was perenially short of foreign exchange and it was obtained by dubious means from Gulf, apart from the fact that Indians working in Gulf were the biggest source of Foreign Exchange.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/indir ... y/237681/0

This pro Arab policy is no longer needed as Indian exports have more than caught up.

What is now needed is Pro Israeli policy. In fact SA should have been told that Mumbai like incident will make India into the next Israel.
If a 6 million population country can regularly twist Arabs, what would a 1.2 billion country do when it comes to twisting.

asprinzl wrote:These same Arabs were celeberating what happened in Bombay especially on Internet forums.
Avram

shynee
BRFite
Posts: 546
Joined: 21 Oct 2003 11:31
Location: US

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby shynee » 11 Jan 2009 10:33

BOOK REVIEW: Insecure with nuclear weapons —by Khaled Ahmed

Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons;
By Bhumitra Chakma;
Routledge 2009;
Pp187;
Price £75;
Available at bookstores in Pakistan

Pakistan’s nuclear acquisitions in the 1980s — thanks to the shadow of the superpowers’ confrontation in Afghanistan under which it was proliferating — made Pakistan more challenging to India on Kashmir in the 1990s. Present was a recessed deterrence which allowed jihad but there were moments of panic in the 1990s when the two tested each other’s invisible red lines. Then both put their bombs on the table and India tried its hand even at a nuclear doctrine; Pakistan was India-specific, too intellectually restricted to announce a doctrine, but faced with problems of ‘minimum deterrence’ across a very severe ‘flying time’ constraint, and India’s ‘strategic depth’.

A significant observation has been made by the author about Pakistan’s ‘first-use’ option: “Even if Pakistan undertakes a first nuclear strike against India, its strategic gains from doing so would be doubtful for the simple reason that after the Pakistani first strike, India still retains sufficient nuclear capacity to undertake a retaliatory strike that may lead to the collapse of the Pakistani state. Moreover, even if New Delhi decides not to retaliate, Pakistan’s gains will still be questionable. If Islamabad strikes first, New Delhi will certainly receive overwhelming international support, including support from the UN Security Council. The ‘political and economic cost’ [according to expert Cirincione] will simply be unbearable for Pakistan. Islamabad indeed confronts formidable dilemmas and challenges in its attempts to construct a viable first-use and war-fighting posture.” (p.55)

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby John Snow » 11 Jan 2009 11:02

With Pranab Uvacha GOI seems to be more and more a collection of

Image

Raju

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Raju » 11 Jan 2009 11:17

negi wrote:And BRF mods ask us to calm down; Pranab da ekdum sathiya gaye hain(gone insane) , some one tell him he cannot seek US help and criticise Israel in same vein. :evil:


Pranab da has been informed that Arab street opinion is sympathetic towards India and against Pakistan. This is the overwhelming UPA feeling.

mnag
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 75
Joined: 01 Jan 2009 01:18

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby mnag » 11 Jan 2009 12:39

with more days passing since 26/11 mumbai incident and indian govt doing nothing except for some speeches by pranab/manmohan once in a while, it looks like no action will happen until the next deadly terrorist incident. india has condemned israel's actions and has made it clear that it is against any military action or surgical strikes. india is hoping that us will miraculously help us out of this situation and hoping that us will fight our war on terror which may not materialise in the near future.

since we also have an election coming up, my guess is that there will be a troop buildup along borders now or prior to elections and there will be some speeches by the netas to convince the electorate that congress/upa is taking action. i think this will be the only indian response to mumbai.

i am not even sure that kasab will get death penalty which would be executed

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2935
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby Kanson » 11 Jan 2009 12:49

Instead of Patil we are seeing Chidambaram. I was always saying that Patil or no Patil it is not going to change.


Viewing the 'Walk the Talk' program on NDTV yesterday, it does'nt look that way. Where Chidambaram is going on business like in filling the gaps related to internal security. But mere words without actions not going to land us anywhere. Let the whats happening in the ground. Whether this gov or any gov, Internal Ministry should be given to some efficient person.

samuel.chandra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 94
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 06:11

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby samuel.chandra » 11 Jan 2009 12:56

Time to open up the purse strings and go vote. UPA should be taught a lesson.

mnag wrote:with more days passing since 26/11 mumbai incident and indian govt doing nothing except for some speeches by pranab/manmohan once in a while, it looks like no action will happen until the next deadly terrorist incident. india has condemned israel's actions and has made it clear that it is against any military action or surgical strikes. india is hoping that us will miraculously help us out of this situation and hoping that us will fight our war on terror which may not materialise in the near future.

since we also have an election coming up, my guess is that there will be a troop buildup along borders now or prior to elections and there will be some speeches by the netas to convince the electorate that congress/upa is taking action. i think this will be the only indian response to mumbai.

i am not even sure that kasab will get death penalty which would be executed

samuel.chandra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 94
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 06:11

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism after Mumbai

Postby samuel.chandra » 11 Jan 2009 12:58

Good article on saag. Describes the mood of the nation. UPA's inaction will eventually cause a nationalist surge that will give BJP the majority that it needs to clean up this country.

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers ... r3004.html

POST MUMBAI 9/11: INDIA PARALYZED BY PAKISTAN’S SUPERIORITY IN “BATTLE OF PERCEPTIONS”

By Dr. Subhash Kapila

Introductory Observations

Pondering agonizingly over India’s paralysis in not striking back credibly against Pakistan in response to the Pakistan Army and its ISI-sponsored “war of terror” assault on India’s sovereignty at Mumbai on November 26, 2008, this Author came across a feature in “The Jerusalem Post” written against the back drop of the assaults on Israel’s sovereignty by Hezbollah earlier and Hamas presently and why Israel strikes back forcefully.

The point that caught attention in this feature was that currently, the Israeli Defense Forces in their senior commanders training lays emphasis on how modern warfare is conducted. Israel believes that emphasis today should not be on which side conquers more territory or loses more fighters and fighter aircraft – as was the case in conventional battles such as the 1967 Six War, “but rather on perceptions. In other words, the victor is the side that is perceived to have won”.

Applying this precept in the context of Mumbai 9/11 and India’s paralysis in the post-Mumbai 9/11 phase of over a month, one painfully comes to the conclusion that the root cause of India’s lack of credible responses against the Pakistani military establishment, the ISI and their affiliated Islamic Jihadi terrorist organizations, is that Pakistan established a superiority over India in the “Battle of Perceptions”.

India’s long history of not striking back at major Pakistan-sponsored terrorism incidents from 1992 onwards, India’s misplaced faith that “Friends of Pakistan” would dissuade Pakistan and restrain Pakistan’s war-like provocations against India and Indian political leadership of the day shirking from the will to use power, despite preponderant instruments of power at their command, led to Mumbai 9/11 – a “war of terror” on India when a handful of Pakistan terrorists held India to ransom for three days in sustained gun battles and blasts. In those three days more than 200 lives were lost.

Post-Mumbai 9/11, India’s political leadership fell back in its traditional mould of shirking to use power to safeguard India’s “National Honour” and the unprovoked assault on her sovereignty.

Brave statements were made by India’s political leaders that “all options are on the table” in terms of a riposte to Pakistan. But the one option that India should have exercised in the first few days of Mumbai 9/11, “continues to lie on the table” even after a month of the attacks.

India’s political leaders to strategically chastise Pakistan for its proven involvement and culpability in Mumbai 9/11 attacks moved away from their strident calls on Pakistan to atone for Mumbai 9/11 to a “diplomatic offensive” to present clinching evidence to world capitals. The Indian policy establishment should realize that it is not fighting a “court case” where evidence will count. Does it not occur to the Indian Government that it is dealing in terms of terrorism with a “rogue state” dominated by Pakistan Army on whose agenda, peace with India does not figure. Nor would any guarantees by Pakistan military establishment count that no further terrorist war against India would take place. Are not Pakistan’s broken pledges to the United States to wage war on terrorism, a lesson to be learnt and kept in mind?

India continued to be let down by its political leaders, policy advisors and policy formulation mechanisms in not responding firmly at the outset and thereby further reinforcing Pakistan’s “perceptions” that India can be played around with and will not respond even after a "thousand bleeding cuts"

The Pakistani policy establishment and its more powerful military establishment stood emboldened by their “perceptions” of India’s leadership vulnerabilities to launch Mumbai 9/11 and stand further emboldened by the “perceptions” once again that India would be unable to strike back and continue to seek assistance and support from “Friends of Pakistan”, rather than acting on her own strengths.

Pakistan therefore stands to have won the “Battle of Perceptions” on both counts due to India’s flawed counter-terrorism responses.

This Author’s last paper entitled “India: Policy Establishments Failure on Pakistan Threat Assessment (SAAG Paper No. 2987 dated 19 Dec. 2008 has already brought out in fair detail the flawed threat assessments on President Zardari and General Kiyani, Pakistan Army Chief of India’s political leadership and India’s policy establishment.

This Paper intends to be a study of the following aspects of the “Battle of Perceptions” between India and Pakistan and is discussed under the following heads:

India’s Flawed Perceptions on Pakistan
India’s Misplaced Perceptions of Trust in “Friends of Pakistan” to Restrain Pakistan’s “War of Terror” Against India
Pakistan’s Perceptions of India’s Paralysis to Strike Back, Post -Mumbai 9/11
This Paper is not going to elaborate on what India’s responses should be, which is a separate subject by itself but focus entirely on why India fails to strike back credibly and creates “wrong perceptions” in Pakistan. Only if India had done so in the past and does so now after her “diplomatic offensive” is over, can then India hope that the “appropriate perceptions” have been created in the Pakistani military establishment's mind that India cannot be messed around with.

But before addressing the above aspects, a bit of digression is required to highlight Indian political leader’s propensity to shirk from safeguarding India’s “National Honor” and India’s propensity to rely on the international community to discipline Pakistan’s “War of Terror”.

India’s Political Leaders Propensity to Shirk from Safeguarding India’s National Honour and Propensity to Seek International Support to Discipline Pakistan’s “War of Terror”

India’s political leadership of both the previous Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the present ruling Congress Party have both demonstrated a propensity to shirk from safeguarding India’s National Honour” and a marked propensity to seek international support, more specifically from the United State to discipline Pakistan’s “War of Terror” against India. Both have abdicated their responsibilities and seek to “outsource India’s counter-terrorism” to the international community.

The BJP after armed attacks on India’s Parliament House in December 2002 mobilized the entire Indian Army on Pakistan’s borders and promised an “Aar Pas Ki Larai”, the mother of all battles, to end Pakistan’s terrorism against India. It was a bold move which could have brought decisive results had Indian forces struck in the first few months. The BJP leadership let the strategic advantage fizzle out after a year, under pressure from the United States.

The Congress government in the wake of Mumbai 9/11 gave strong indications that it would indulge in air and missile strikes and should Pakistan enlarge the conflict use India’s conventional might. Once again, history has been repeated and the Congress Government, like the BJP Government buckled under United States pressures for restraint. Once again India’s strategic advantages over Pakistan were foreclosed.

India’s political leaders of all political dispensations need to be reminded of a few home-truths on both these counts from two quotations from the noted British strategist Maj. Gen. Fuller, which this Author incorporated in the last chapter entitled “Prescriptions for India’s National Security” in his book “India’s Defence Policies & Strategic Thought: A Comparative Analysis”. They read as follows. First on “National Honour”:

“There is only one balsam which can make peace worth living – Honour, which is righteousness. There are sublimer ideals than mere peacefulness, and honour is one of these. Peace without honour is degradation and as a noble woman safeguards her honour, and will even sacrifice her life to maintain it in order to keep the family clean, and as a man will give up his life to protect her and her children, so will an upright nation because of its honour, not only protect but sacrifice itself for righteousness cause. All may be lost save honour, for without honour mankind ceases to be human”

and then the thoughts on nations relying on international support to safeguard “National Honour” and this presently applies to India in more ways than one:

“The nation which depends for the security of its honour on some international force (or support from a superpower: my emphasis) has become but a kept woman among nations. There is only one guardian of honour – a virile arm backed by a virile brain. Again a state, which is not prepared to defend its honour by a righteous war, and depends on the benevolence of others to guarantee its existence, when life is threatened, is but a paralytic living in an alm-house; it has scarcely the right to live, for it lacks the might to thrive”

These two messages for all Indian political leaders should be self-explanatory and also denote what Indian public opinion expect from their political leaders, especially when after Mumbai 9/11 Indian nationalism stands aroused.

If India’s political leaders pay heed to these two maxims, they would be able to ensure that the next time around India is subjected to another Pak-initiated terrorist strike, India’s instruments of power stand readied and are used for flick-knife retaliation without the agony of unending debates on Indian TV and media as to what India’s options should be. Nor would there be any requirement to heed advice of “Look before you leap”, India should at all times be ready for a strategic and military leap to chastise its aggressors.

India’s Flawed Perceptions on Pakistan

India’s political leaderships and policy establishment’s flawed perceptions and misplaced readings on the emergence of President Zardari and General Kayani and their impact on Indo-Pak security environment stand discussed in the last Paper of this Author. Timely warnings on these two dignitaries on this account, given months in advance of Mumbai 9/11 stood reflected in this Author’s Papers since mid-2008.

India’s flawed perceptions on Pakistan prevailing in the mindsets of Indian political leaders and policy making establishment are reflected below in brief.

Strategically and militarily, the following misperceptions seem to prevail in India’s policy making circles: (1) Pakistan with its nuclear weapons arsenal is the strategic equal of India (2) In case of Indian military strikes against Pakistan, that country could strike back with nuclear weapons (3) Pakistan has the capability and wherewithal to enlarge a limited war into a general war (4) China could enlarge and intervene in any Indo-Pakistan armed conflict (5) Pakistan can inflict massive damage in retaliation of Indian strikes.

India should welcome Pakistan crossing the nuclear threshold as it would be a suicidal step for the destruction and disintegration of Pakistan. China in the current security environment where Pakistan’s “war of terror” could visit Xinjiang also would not be tempted to go beyond rhetoric in any Indo-Pak armed conflict.

Politically, the Indian policy making mindset is dominated by the following misperceptions (1) Pakistan could develop into a peaceful neighbor with more political patience and understanding from India (2) Pakistan’s politics domination by Islamic fundamentalist elements could fade away (3) Pakistan Army could be brought under firm control of a civilian democratic political government (4) Pakistan’s civil society wants peace with India (5) Pakistan’s civil society could bring about the over throw of Pakistan Army’s political dominance of Pakistan’s governance (6) Track II diplomacy and use of Special Indian Envoys to Pakistan could facilitate peaceful Indo-Pak relations (7) Pakistan is a responsible stake-holder in regional peace and a responsible member of the international community.

To any discerning Indian policy maker it should be evidently clear that all the above perceptions of Indian policy establishment on Pakistan are misplaced and wrong. There are no concrete indications on the ground to suggest otherwise.

It are these strategic, military and more substantially the political misperceptions on Pakistan which have distorted Indian policy-makers formulations on Pakistan and the absence of an Indian credible response to Pakistan’s provocation “war of terror” against India.

India’s political leaders and policy establishment needs to recognize the reality that more than a decade of Track II diplomacy and the flitting of Special Envoys between New Delhi and Islamabad have not brought the two countries to peaceful co-existence. This is for the simple reason that the Pakistan Army calls the shots in Pakistan on its foreign policies and peace with India is not Pakistan Army’s objective.

India’s Misplaced Perceptions of Trust in “Friends of Pakistan” to Restrain Pakistan’s “War of Terror” Against India

Pakistan would like to claim the international community as “Friends of Pakistan” because most of the Western countries, China and the oil-rich Islamic monarchies of the Gulf Region bankroll Pakistan’s sustenance, notwithstanding that the bulk of these finances are diverted to the Pakistan Army and the operation of Pakistan’s “War of Terror” against India and Afghanistan.

In terms of discussion of India’s misplaced trust in “Friends of Pakistan” to restrain Pakistan’s “War of Terror” against India, the discussion in this Paper would focus on the role of the United States, China and Saudi Arabia.

Despite 9/11 when the United States itself was subjected to a combination of Pakistani operated and Saudi-financed terrorism onslaught against mainland USA, the United States has been reluctant to recognize that the Pakistani “War of Terror” against India is also part of the global Islamic Jihad and needs to be firmly dealt with in a concerted manner by the global community by backing strong actions by India against Pakistan, rather than diplomacy.

The United States has the strategic, military, political and economic clout to stop Pakistan’s “War of Terror” against India. But it would not use that clout, because Pakistan colludes in American strategy in the region and India does not.

India’s trust that an evolving US-India Strategic Partnership would make America play a different ball-game in South Asia, vis-à-vis Pakistan, is grossly misplaced, in light of Mumbai 9/11.

The flurry of top US dignitaries visiting New Delhi in the wake of Mumbai 9/11 were not intended to reinforce New Delhi’s resolve to strike back at Pakistan but to pressurize India not to resort to military strikes against Pakistan and exercise restraint.

China enjoys even more stronger strategic, military, political and economic clout over Pakistan. In the wake of Mumbai 9/11 and moreso in the years preceding it, China was in a strong and coercive position to restrain Pakistan’s “War of Terror” against India. It did not do so for reasons best known to every Indian.

In the wake of Mumbai 9/11, China has advocated restraint on both India and Pakistan. However the actual message should have been a stern and salutary message by China to Pakistan, that its “War of Terror” in the region, which may eventually engulf Xinjiang too, should stop. China can be expected to continue to support Pakistan even now in its face-off with India.

Saudi Arabia as far as international terrorism is concerned is along with Pakistan is the “Real Axis of Evil”. Saudi Arabian Islamic charities finance Pakistani terrorist organizations “War of Terror” on both flanks of Pakistan. Pakistan is heavily dependant on Saudi Arabia for free oil supplies, financial aid and political backing. Saudi Arabia more than USA and China could discipline Pakistan in a second if it wishes to.

The visit of Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister last month was meaningless. He hesitated and shirked from condemning Pakistan’s “War of Terror” against India. His visit was meaningless even if India intended that through it to send a message to Islamic Countries.

In any case it should have struck the Indian policy establishment that no Gulf Region Islamic countries have come out with any outright condemnation of Pakistan following 9/11. Further the media in these countries has been spewing vitriolic outbursts that India is now involved in American-Zionist conspiracies to fragment Pakistan and its nuclear arsenal – the only one in the Islamic world. More cynically that Mumbai 9/11 was fabricated by India intelligence agencies as an excuse for the above.

All in all, the stark pointer is that India cannot rely on the international community to curb Pakistan’s “War of Terror”. The “Friends of Pakistan” count on Pakistan to serve their strategic ends and would go to great lengths to protect Pakistan from India’s wrath however well placed.

Pakistan’s Perceptions of India’s Paralysis to Strike Back, Post Mumbai 9/11

In the “Battle of Perceptions” post-Mumbai 9/11 Pakistan seems to have established a superiority over India by correctly perceiving India’s paralysis.

Gleaning through the demonstrated performance and statements of Pakistan’s political and military leaders and the writings of Pakistani columnists in their media, the Pakistani perceptions of India’s paralysis to strike back post-Mumbai 9/11 were read as follows: (1) India failed to strike back against Pakistan in 2002-2003 OP PRAKARM despite an initial advantage of surprise and strength. (2) In the large number of major terrorist attacks in India by Pak-sponsored terrorists or their modules within India there were no retaliatory responses from India (3) India every time took the “softer route” of attempting to enlist international condemnation against Pakistan (4) Pakistan this time too was confident that after the first few days of general condemnation, the international community would lapse back as hithertofore (5) Pakistani columnists harped on India’s military machine not being fully prepared for war due to incomplete inventories and slow inflow of Russian military hardware (6) Pakistan’s military establishment was confident in their perceptions that India would not be able to obtain substantial USA, China, Saudi Arabia backing for Indian retaliatory strikes against Pakistan.(7) India would be held back by fears that any assertive step could lead to internationalizing of the Kashmir issue.

Indian political leader’s propensity to shirk away from using “hard options” to protect India’s “National Honour” and rely more on international condemnation of Pakistan was correctly read by the Pakistani military establishment.

The course of events even after a month post-Mumbai 9/11 seem to bear out Pakistan’s military establishments perceptions of India in terms of retaliatory strikes or other hard actions.

To that extent it can be said that Pakistan has established superiority over India in the “Battle of Perceptions” unless India now decides to change course, in confronting Pakistan’s “War of Terror” against India.

The current "diplomatic offensive" by India and providing dossiers of clinching involvement of Pakistan's official establishment in Mumbai 9/11 will not shame the Pakistani military establishment or prompt it to any positive action to dismantle its terror-networks or extradite the wanted terrorists to India for trial.

At the end of this "diplomatic offensive" Pakistan's military establishment's "Perceptions" of India's soft responses would continue.

India would be left then with only two options, namely to execute military strikes against Pakistan or just accept a "lump-it" situation.

Concluding Observations

The major concluding observations that need to be made are as under:

India cannot endlessly go on buckling to Pakistan Army sponsored and Pakistan based “War of Terror” against India.
The next such “War of Terror” strike against India would perforce pressurize the present Indian Government or the one that succeeds it to go in for the “hard option” of retaliatory military strikes, irrespective of the cost.
USA, China and Saudi Arabia would be well-advised as “Friends of Pakistan” to clamp down on Pakistan Army sponsored terrorist organization in Pakistan and their disruptive activities as any future conflict on this count could also jeopardize their respective national security interests in this region.
Pakistan itself needs to realize that when its traditional intransigence against India pushes India to the wall, it could result in another fragmentation of Pakistan as in 1971.
India needs to recognize that “diplomatic offensives” do not tame strategic delinquencies of military-dominated nations like Pakistan. Hard options are called for:
Finally, India’s political leaders need to recognize that threats to Indian “National Honour”, sovereignty and security have to met squarely and eliminated by India and India alone. India's counter-terrorism operations cannot be "out-sourced" to others.


Return to “Terrorism Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest