Intelligence fails to deliver

Siddharth Srivastava 

The repeated targeting of the innocent by the terror outfits has raised questions about the functioning of the intelligence agencies. Their failure to provide specific information has been admitted by the National Security adviser to Prime Minister and yet there is no sign that someone is being held responsible for it. Meanwhile terror outfits continue to threaten Pakistan of dire consequences if it goes soft on the Kashmir issue. 

India's intelligence and security outfits are under scrutiny following the recent serial blasts that killed 80 people and injured 200 in Jaipur, capital of the tourist state of Rajasthan.

Questions are being raised about the competence and accountability of India's official intelligence framework, both at state and federal levels, that seems to have consistently failed to deliver efficient information systems able to pre-empt the repeated terror strikes.

Experts say that close surveillance in a vast and complex country such as India, given the rudimentary infrastructure and lack of funds, is near impossible. However, terror attacks can be thwarted by effective intelligence-gathering and there can be no excuses for repeated let-downs.

Follow-up investigations after the terror attacks have been shoddy. Ground-level policing remains abysmal, even as well-funded terrorist cells around the world adopt the latest technology and foolproof attack methods.

There is some recognition of the inadequacies. In a press conference following the Jaipur blasts, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh claimed that intelligence agencies had managed to prevent several attacks, though the reality of innumerable terror strikes remains stark. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has called for the setting up of a unified federal crime agency, a proposal, he said, that had not taken off as states were hesitant to "surrender [their] powers".

He said a federal agency was required as terrorism had inter-state spans and separation of intelligence-gathering and investigating arms created coordination and implementation issues.

However, in a more damning self-indictment, National Security Advisor (NSA) M K Narayanan, who reports to the Prime Minister directly, blamed the intelligence agencies that he leads for not providing "actionable intelligence" on terror attacks.

The NSA reportedly told the federal cabinet that there was no warning about the jihadi attack on Jaipur. "There is no proper coordination between the state intelligence-gathering machinery and the federal Intelligence Bureau (IB that looks at internal security matters). The inputs provided by the IB are imprecise," he is reported to have said.

Narayanan's supposed admission has resulted in several scathing reactions that include holding Narayanan, who has been NSA for four years, as equally culpable. In the private sector, a chief executive officer would perhaps be fired and saddled with court cases for a much lesser mistake. Aren't public functionaries as responsible, is the refrain? Why do they go scot-free every time? As is usual, the political blame game over the Jaipur attacks is well underway, with real issues connected to reforming the system sidelined.

The federal government has accused the state of failure, and vice versa. It has not helped matters that the Rajasthan is presently ruled by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) while a Congress-led dispensation holds power in New Delhi.

Contrary to Narayanan's assertions, the Congress party has claimed that the government had warned about possible attacks in the state, while BJP leader Narender Modi, the chief minister of Gujarat, has said that terror warnings by Delhi to states are like weather bulletins that are vague and that nobody takes seriously or understands.

Keeping a firm eye on general elections scheduled in a year, the BJP has blamed the Congress for being "soft on terror", going easy on Bangladeshi immigrants and not pushing Pakistan enough to take on terror cells.

The BJP has called for the revocation of anti-terror laws such as the 2002 Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) that has been scrapped by the Congress due to alleged human-rights violations, especially against Muslims.

Observers, however, say that the real problem has been forgotten in the political melee which is the failure of Indian intelligence networks to sufficiently infiltrate known terror cells to thwart possible attacks. Indeed, militant strikes in India happen with alarming regularity using the same methods and strategy.

In the past two years, including at Jaipur, most of the attacks (that cover almost the entire country, including Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Varanasi) have been via easy to assemble low-medium intensity bombs that use ammonium nitrate and RDX that has to be smuggled is also used.

The bombs are placed at strategically chosen soft targets in crowded areas for maximum human casualties. Attacks on temples and mosques are aimed at inciting communal violence.

Indian intelligence agencies say, as also in the Jaipur blasts, that the suspicion points to Bangladesh-based Harkat-ul Jihad al-Islami and Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT), with the local Students Islamic Movement of India being a party.

Yet, the counter-terrorism apparatus does not inspire confidence. The IB, in charge of domestic undercover operations, is woefully understaffed, with a staff strength of 20,000 for a billion-plus Indian population. Further, barely 10% of the IB is involved in actual tough and risky field operations, while the rest are involved in administration and management of the so-called force.

India's external intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing is also saddled with similar odds. India's civil police strength is about 1 million, which means that each cop is responsible for over 1,000 citizens, an impossible ask.

There have been several suggestions of improvement. The chief justice of India K G Balakrishnan has said that "stringent laws" were required to fight terrorism. An Administrative Reforms Commission has been looking at fresh proposals to tackle terrorism that would deepen the federal government's role in taking on terror. The aim is to give POTA-like power to law-enforcing agencies with provisions to protect human rights.

Writing in Outlook magazine, Ajit Doval, former IB director, said: "We need a different paradigm when combating terrorism with intelligence. What we have is one set of people who collect intelligence and another who act on it. Our task is to work at integrating intelligence agencies with security groups legally empowered to act."

Even as India's anti-terror efforts remain in the realm of debate and discourse, terror outfits LeT and Hizbul Mujahideen have cautioned the new Pakistan government against softening its approach towards India and threatened to launch a "war in Islamabad and Lahore" if there is any "retreat" on the vexed Kashmir issue.

The warnings were issued even as India's Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee embarked on a high-profile visit to Islamabad this week to further the stalled peace process and composite dialogue. Indian officials fear an increased role of the military backed Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in attacks.

Terror strikes have stalled initiatives of the Pakistani democratic government to normalize relations with India and make it dubious in the eyes of the population which increasingly wants Indian prosperity and growth to be replicated at home. Failure of the elected government suits the interests of the military and ISI.

A recent assessment by US intelligence has underlined that the LeT and other militant groups that operate on the premise of "freeing" Indian-administered Kashmir will continue to orchestrate "attacks" in India. "Shi'ite and Hindu religious observances are possible targets", the report said.

Clearly, a lot remains to be done to counter the terror that has claimed thousands of innocent victims in India.