Patna Blasts – Implications Under Assessed
Ajit Doval, KC
The serial blasts that took place in Patna’s Gandhi Maidan
on October 27, 2013 during BJP’s Hunkar rally was an event whose seriousness
and implications have not been fully fathomed. In a setting consumed by
ruthless electoral rivalries, the powers that be, have failed to assess the
incident in its correct perspective and respond adequately. The event heralds a
new genre of terrorist threat, where the objective was not so much to cause
depredations as to prevent the people and the leaders from pursuing their
lawful right of assembly and speech. The trend, if unchecked, could derail democratic process, undermine
constitutional freedoms and seriously destabilise the country. If the
terrorists even marginally improve upon their Patna performance, democracy in
the country will get a body blow with no political party or political leader
remaining safe enough to carry out their legitimate political activities.
Further, if the terrorists succeed in doing it to one – and their capacities
are not degraded – they will do it to all; those in power becoming especially vulnerable. Long term implications
would be still more dreadful and one would like to restrain oneself from alluding to them. This calls for
a careful analysis of the event, re-assessing terrorist intentions and
capabilities, evaluating efficacy of our response strategies and plugging the gaps in our level of security
preparedness.
The first reality that the event brings forth is that the
Indian Mujahideen (IM), though incubated by the Pakistan’s ISI and a satellite
of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), has amassed significant domestic content that we
cannot wish away for political expediency. No responses can be strategised or
meaningful policies executed by remaining in a denial mode. Since its inception
in 2005, in last eight years, the IM has acquired menacing proportions both in
its geographical spread and cadre strength. Its activities and existence of
local cells have been reported from the states of Delhi, UP, Karnataka,
Maharashtra, Bihar, Jhrakhand, Kerala, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh etc. Patna
blasts when analysed along with the stunning disclosures made by Abdul Kareem
Tunda, Riyaz Bhatkal and Abu Jundal, the indigenisation of Jihadi terror in
India presents a disturbing spectre. If the menace continuous to grow unabated
at the pace of last eight years it may soon become unmanageable. The tendency
of its getting intertwined with domestic politics will make things worse.
Contrary to what their apologists would like us to believe, their Jihad does
not spring due to the lack of economic or social upliftment but their plain and
simple aim of degrading the Indian state and establishing sharia rule. This aim mirrors that of global
Jihadist groups like the Al Qaeda and LeT. It is true that their goal is
neither achievable nor enjoys support of Indian Muslims, but that does not
reduce their capacity to destabilise the country. Attack on the Patna rally is an early
indication of that.
The second reality that the blasts demonstrate is that the
Bihar policy of let sleeping dogs lie does not pay. The Bihar government has
been pursuing the policy of conflict avoidance against all extremist groups,
particularly the Jihadis, hoping that
the soft policy will insulate them from the threat. Bihar has been an important
hub of IM activities right from its inception and a good number of its front
ranking activists like Tehseen Akhtar and Haider Ali, who are presently driving
IM’s activities in India hail from the state. Proximity to Nepal made it a
favoured transit route for the IM members but no interceptions were attempted.
Many IM activists considered Bihar as a safe haven and sought refuge there when
under pressure from other police forces. In the last two years alone nearly 15
IM suspects belonging to Bihar were either arrested outside Bihar or the police
forces of other states nabbed them from Bihar. Bihar police often resented
their forays. The political argument of Muslim sensitivity is completely unfounded
as no Muslim leader of the country supports Jihadis though want innocents to be
spared.
Another reality that the blasts brings forth is the failure of
the Bihar police to anticipate and take counter measures to defeat any
terrorist or extremist threat. For a rally of this magnitude and considering
high security vulnerability of the leaders attending it, they did not follow
even rudimentary principles of security. Had proper area sanitization or access
control measures taken, the terrorists would not have succeeded in placing 15
IEDs at the venue. An indifferent style of policing over the years had impaired
the required verve and resoluteness of the force. Bihar police refusing to
cooperate with the IB in seeking remand
of Yasin Bhatkal, despite his links with the infamous Darbhanga module, is illustrative of their indifference. The state police refusing to
join the Advance Security Liaison (ASL) exercise with the IB and Gujarat police
before the rally and later even refusing to accept and sign it for taking
follow up action is unpardonable. In this environment, October 27 blasts were
just waiting to happen.
When the Home Minister in March this year announced a
judicial probe into suicide in jail by the prime accused in the gruesome
Nirbhaya gang rape case, many who preferred to see him dead than alive,
grudgingly accepted it. It is, however, intriguing that in a country where
inquiry commissions are appointed at the drop of a hat, Patna blasts which
presented an imminent and real threat to some of the top political leaders of
the country and led to the death of six persons, with over 80 injured, was not
considered fit enough even for a low grade magisterial inquiry. Both the
central and state governments, more by
design than default, preferred to ignore it. The assertion of the Bihar Chief
Minister that there was no security lapse implies that little improvement can
be expected in future. Although Narendra Modi’s security has been beefed up
following the blasts it is adhoc and not co-related to a proper threat
assessment. The bigger issue is with how much seriousness do we tackle the
challenge thrown by the IM and the measures that we take to deny them both
their means and the ends. A high level judicial probe focusing on these issues
will help.
(The author is Director, Vivekananda International
Foundation, New Delhi)