By Radha Kumar
-Analysis-
NEW DELHI — The terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir that killed 26 people – 24 tourists from the rest of India and one from Nepal, along with a Kashmiri guide who gave his life to protect his customers – has aroused wholehearted condemnation from across Jammu and Kashmir, India as a whole and much of the rest of the world.
In Kashmir, marches mourning the loss of precious lives were accompanied by anger against the terrorists – “They (the tourists) were our guests, and you killed them…not in our name.”
Sadly, it took a long 36-48 hours before the Indian media reported the protests in Jammu and Kashmir, and even when they did, they did so only cursorily, displaying profound ignorance of the history of Kashmiri resistance to violence.
Kashmiri’s reputation
“This is the first time that Kashmiris have protested terrorist killings,” a CNN-18 reporter said. She was, of course, wrong. Kashmiris fought alongside Indian troops to repulse Pakistani raiders in 1948-49; even during the height of the 1990s insurgency, more opposed it than defended it.
“Do you accept that there is local support (for terrorists),” Rajdeep Sardesai thundered at Farooq Abdullah on India Today TV, forgetting that Abdullah’s party, the National Conference, has lost more lives to terrorism than any other civilian body.
Most importantly, the graph of lives lost due to terrorism and counter-insurgency operations would not have fallen from 2002 till today had it not been for Kashmiri involvement in and support for the then peace process (2002-2013). Even under the gross provocation of having their autonomy and statehood removed in 2019, Kashmiris remained mostly stoic. And two days ago, it was local Kashmiris who rescued wounded tourists and ferried them to the hospital, until the police and army arrived.
Harassment never ended
Unfortunately, this truth has not yet been learned in our country. Kashmiri students in other parts of India, such as Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, have already begun to be threatened by colleagues who should protect them.
As many as 1,500 people have been taken into preventive detention. For what?
Back in 2010, similar harassment of students took place across India, in response to the stone-pelting agitation in Kashmir. As government-appointed interlocutors, we asked then Minister of Home Affairs P. Chidambaram to issue a notice to all police that they should ensure Kashmiri students were not discriminated against or harassed, including in their colleges or by landlords. To his credit, he did so immediately, and the harassment declined though it did not fully end. Will Minister of Home Affairs Amit Shah do likewise?
Newspaper reports suggest that as many as 1,500 people have been taken into preventive detention. For what? They cannot all provide useful information – it is beyond the bounds of possibility that 1,500 people knew the terrorists or those who might have aided them, while the intelligence agencies only had a general alert that an attack was being planned without knowing where or when. Do the authorities fear that these 1500 might provide shelter or support for the fleeing terrorists (so large a number, surely not?), or that they might foment discontent now? If the latter, won’t mass arrests foment discontent anyway?
Chance for redemption
This moment of unity offers a rare opportunity to roll back the communal tide, restore human and political rights and institute a Kashmir-based peace process on the ground. The Pahalgam attack, like others conducted by Pakistan-based armed groups, sought to inflame a growing Hindu-Muslim divide in India. Kashmiri repudiation of it offers the Modi administration a chance not only to win Kashmiri hearts and minds but also to stem communal polarisation across the country, some of it instigated by his own party members, legislators and administrators. Not to do so risks playing into terrorist hands.
This moment also offers an opportunity to restore human and political rights in the former state. One measure of good faith would be to speedily release those of the detained 1,500 who have no information of value and ensure that the remaining have immediate access to lawyers.
There is nothing the terrorists would like more than to portray Kashmir as suffering the Indian yoke
More importantly, to revive faith in the democratic process as well as strengthen security, the home ministry could set up a strategy coordinating body that would comprise chief minister Omar Abdullah, the union territory’s home minister, the General Officers (Commanding) of Jammu and Kashmir and the directors-general of police and intelligence in the Union Territory. Such a body had been set up during Mufti Muhammad Sayeed’s first term, and by all accounts was quite successful.
Statehood in limbo
Indications are that the terrorist attack has put statehood back in limbo. That, too, would be a mistake. There is nothing the terrorists would like more than to portray Kashmir as suffering the Indian yoke. Of course, thwarting inimical designs cannot be a primary reason for restoring statehood – that is a constitutional right – but if thwarting terrorists is an additional benefit that is all the better. Some wannabe authoritarians will argue that statehood will negatively impact security and embolden militancy. They might even point to the recent attack as evidence of loosening security after an elected administration took office.
The flaws in such an argument are evident. Security is in the hands of the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Lieutenant Governor. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah was not even invited to the security review held by Shah before the attack. Control over all law and order – from the police to the state attorney-general and prosecutors – vests in the Lieutenant Governor and Ministry of Home Affairs. Any security lapses, and there do seem to have been significant ones – lie squarely at their doors.
Could the attack have been prevented or at least dealt with summarily? It is difficult to say. It seems there was an intelligence alert of an impending terrorist attack, but the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Lieutenant Governor’s office, military and police personnel overlooked the potential danger in Pahalgam. We are now told that the area in question, Baisaran, had been closed to tourists until April 20, and that local tour operators decided on their own to open it. This seems implausible.
An enquiry into such lapses is required
Isn’t it more likely that everyone knew that Baisaran was only closed till April 20, but no-one thought of securing the area? In fact, it now appears that there had been a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) post there, but it had been removed and was not reinstated, even after the intelligence alert. That may be the most serious lapse of all.
Moreover, the official explanation does not answer two questions:
First, why, on receiving the intelligence alert, didn’t the Ministry of Home Affairs issue a general caution to residents as well as visitors to stay in guarded areas for the time being or leave?
Second, why hadn’t they arranged security for a popular destination such as Pahalgam, which has suffered terrorist strikes in the past, in any case?
This is not the only security lapse in Jammu and Kashmir in recent years. The 2019 Pulwama attack, in which we lost 40 troops, was another instance of failure to act on intelligence. Surely an enquiry into such lapses is required, together with implementable recommendations on how to ensure they do not recur?
Pakistan’s reaction
Turning finally to Pakistan, the Modi administration acted swiftly to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, reduce the number of diplomatic and military personnel permitted at the Pakistan High Commission and cancel visas of Pakistan nationals. How effective these preliminary measures will be is unclear. India cannot stop the flow of river waters to Pakistan, though it might be able to temporarily impede them. The Pakistan government has responded by closing its airspace to India, threatening to withdraw from the Simla agreement and saying it will regard any diversion of waters as an act of war. It would have been wiser to offer all cooperation in investigating the attack and tracking the alleged perpetrators.
Whether the Pakistan government will alter its position under pressure from allies such as the US, is unclear.. Even when a Pakistan government did offer cooperation, after the 2009 Mumbai attacks, implementation was feeble, and Pakistani agencies engaged in a cover-up that was so blatantly shoddy that even their well-wishers found it difficult to believe.
Yet, as we all know, it is impossible to end cross-border terrorism without Pakistan’s cooperation. There seemed a time, not so long ago, when Pakistani generals appeared to have concluded that rescuing the country’s economy was more important than bleeding India.
What to do with a country that is nuclear-armed, has tactical nuclear weapons, and had moved them to the Indian border in 1999?
In his first couple of years, the Pakistan army chief General Bajwa reined in armed groups, but the 2019 Pulwama attack derailed an initiative that might have had promising results.
The overall conclusion in India is that the only way to get Pakistan to relinquish its India policy is to make it too costly to pursue. But how is that to be done with a country that has allies willing to bail it out, such as China? Indeed, how is that to be done with a country that is nuclear-armed, has tactical nuclear weapons, and had moved them to the Indian border in 1999?
Modi’s plans
It is unclear what Indian measures might follow. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has vowed to track “the terrorists and their backers to the ends of the earth”. How his administration will do that will become clearer in the coming weeks.
In the meantime, we can only hope that his administration, party and supporting groups see the wisdom of muting communal and hate speech, protecting Kashmiris from harassment or attack in the rest of India, beginning a process of empowering Jammu and Kashmir’s elected administration and engaging in a peace process with its people.