VARANASI BLASTS: THE UNENDING SAGA OF TERROR by Swati Parashar, South Asia Analysis Group, March 20, 2006
http://www.saag.org/papers18/paper1742.html As news about the three bomb blasts that rocked the city of Varanasi, in the state of Uttar Pradesh in India on March 7, 2006, began to reach Indians far and wide, there was an outpour of anger and rage across the spectrum. Many analysts have argued that anti-Islamic feelings would be strengthened by these attacks on one of the Holiest Hindu cities and that there are possibilities of a communal backlash in sensitive parts of the country. Since the attacks, there are no reports of communal violence in any part of the country. Does it mean that Indians in general have become immune to such dastardly acts of terrorism, or is it a lull before the storm? What is the significance of these attacks? Who are the perpetrators? What is the future of this kind of terrorism? These and several other questions are behind the uneasiness that is rife in every Indian mind today. Clearly, the air may be calm but the hearts are not. Not one single terrorist attack on the United States after 9/11, not another in the UK after 7/7, not one attack on the Australian soil as yet, when supposedly the entire Al Qaeda movement is targeted against them. India on the other hand barely recovers from one attack when another is successfully launched. It is this never-ending saga of terror that needs to be examined. Is the Indian counter-terrorism strategy rendered completely ineffectual? Is the Indian pride in claiming that Indian Muslims have not been a part of the Al Qaeda movement, nor have participated in jihad anywhere in the world, misplaced? Is democracy truly the panacea to terrorism? If terrorism is an act perpetrated by those who have real or perceived grievances against the state, it is inevitable that only democracies can articulate these grievances and allow for dissenting voices and spaces. Has the democratic, secular and resilient Indian state failed its own people? Why does India seem like a soft state, an easy target for terrorists out to destroy the secular fabric of the country? What is it that we lack in responding to terrorism when we keep claiming ours is a more inclusive and comprehensive, proactive strategy to deal with terrorism as against the reactive and militarised counter-terrorism policies of the United States and its allies, who have clearly been successful in containing terrorism in their territories? Atleast 23 people died, and many others were injured, some critically, in the Varanasi attacks at the famous 'Sankat Mochan' temple and at the railway station. This is the fifth attack in a series of attacks targeted at Hindu places of worship. It began with the 2002 March and November attacks on the 'Raghunath' temple in Jammu, Sept. 2003 attack on the 'Akshardham' temple in Gujarat and the thwarted July 2005 attack in the disputed shrine at Ayodhya in the state of Uttar Pradesh. There were reports of another planned attack on the 'Vaishno Devi' Shrine yatra route in Katra, Jammu. This attack was foiled by police, owing to good intelligence provided by the local people. The message of these attacks in the city of Varanasi is loud and clear. These are all well planned and executed attacks on religious places of a particular community with the intention of causing maximum damage to the shrine, for its symbolic religious value. The attackers intended to inflict maximum casualties, and to foment communal violence. The Varanasi temple was attacked on a Tuesday when the temple attendance is very high owing to it being the day of the deity 'Hanuman' and also just a few minutes prior to the 'aarti' when people gather for a community chanting of prayers in the evening. The tactical change, moving to mass casualty attacks, began with the attacks at the Jammu railway station in Jan 2004, and continued with the Paharganj railway station in Delhi (Oct. 2005) and now at Varanasi. This proves that railway stations and places of worship, which attract maximum crowds at any given point of time are becoming popular targets of attack for maximum impact through large number of casualties. Prior to 2004, terrorist groups in India limited their operations to political targets, such as the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly building and the Indian Parliament attacks (2001) including assassination attempts on leading political personalities. The targets have clearly shifted to aforementioned religious and transportation targets. It is a tactical move in the grand strategy of the Kashmiri and Pakistani jihadi groups to weaken the Indian state in tandem with the declaration of the Lashkar-e-Toiba Chief, Hafiz Saeed, at a giant rally in Nov. 1999 held by its parent organisation, the Markaz Dawat wal Irshad, that India should break up and no jihadi should rest till India is completely dissolved into Pakistan. A spokesman, Abdullah Jabbar alias Abu Kahar, for a group calling itself the Lashkar-e-Kahar has claimed resposnsibility for the attacks, but most security experts believe that this is a non-de-gurre for the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT). Other security sources claim that the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) may be responsible. These are the two most likely suspects. The case for Lashkar's possible involvement in these temple attacks is also strengthened by the fact that in 2003, the Jammu and Kashmir police discovered, after the arrest of the LeT district commander-cum-finance chief for Anantnag district in Jammu and Kashmir, Zia Mustafa, alias Arbaz alias Abdullah Umer that the Lashkar had planned a series of attacks on the VHP and the RSS activists, including temples across the country, to avenge the killings of the Gujarat riots and the Muslims suffering under the Indian state in Jammu and Kashmir. Umer also revealed that the LeT operatives were asked to establish their presence among Muslim youth in Delhi, Gujarat and other parts of the country for waging jihad. The fast growing LeT network in the country has been a cause of concern to the intelligence agencies. Varanasi has long been on LeT's target list. The chief conspirator of the American Center attack in Kolkata was Farhan Mallick, a native of Varanasi. A letter claiming responsibility for that attack threatened that 'AL Qaeda' would target Indian interests worldwide including in Varanasi. Farhan was not an isolated operative and had been in contact with Sayed Omar Sheikh, the right hand man of Azhar Mehmood, released during the Kandahar hijacking crisis. Farhan alias Aftab also has links with Anees Ibrahim, the brother of Dawood Ibrahim, the mafia terrorist living in Pakistan. The political blame game has reached new proportions with the opposition Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) blaming the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) coaltion government's minority appeasement policies as emboldening the radical elements within the Muslim community to launch attacks on the Hindus. Some people are also of the opinion that in the light of the recent dressing down received by Gen. Musharraf from President Bush while on his visit to Islamabad, and the lavish praises heaped on India by the American President, these attacks were carried out by the active collusion of Pakistan. One of the objectives of these attacks is to tarnish India's image, which has been enhanced with the new nuclear agreement between India and the United States. The two largest democracies in the world are working closely towards a strong strategic partnership with the US now recognizing India's potential as a rising power in Asia. Some analysts also linked these attacks to the recent communal clashes in Lucknow, which were sparked off by anti-Bush protests in the city. Whatever, maybe the reasons behind these attacks, what is clear is that it was a well planned and executed attack that was probably carried out with the help of some indigenous elements. Ratcheting up the rhetoric, calling the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a right wing Hindu organisation, the Hindu 'Al Qaeda' by certain minority leaders and equating these blasts in Varanasi to the 'Babri Masjid' demolition accomplishes little, except to continue to increase communal tensions. The blame on the UPA government by the opposition is also misplaced considering that the Akshardham and the Parliament attacks had happened when the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), led by the BJP was in power and was actively engaged in a peace process with Pakistan under the leadership of Prime Minister Vajpayee. This political gimmicking is the usual pattern of response by the right, left and even the centrist political forces to any terrorist attacks in the country. This only serves to dilute the focus on investigations and a unified response is always lacking. Parts of India, including Varanasi are vulnerable to communal clashes as any desecration or attack on a place of worship is seen as an attack on the entire community. However, even as the state governments and local authorities keep vigil in Varanasi and other sensitive parts of the country there are no reports of a communal backlash as yet. The police in Varanasi also think that it is not very likely that a communal clash may occur as the incident is not provocative enough for the people to indulge in riots targeting their immediate friends and neighbours who have nothing to do with these attacks. Moreover, the temple itself and the deity are intact helping to control an emotional outburst. Communal clashes in other parts of the country are also not likely considering that attacks have happened on places of worship in the past without a frenzied communal reaction from the masses. Communal riots in India also owe a great deal to the politicization of any pressing and immediate religious grievance or issue and the active involvement of the political elements. With political parties too caught up in the blame game, they have little time to actively lead and participate in communal violence, as has been the case in the past. Also the reason why the 'Babri' mosque demolition was followed by a communal backlash was because there was visible involvement of the local people, of fellow Indians who were then seen as enemies. An attack like the one in the temple in Varanasi is not likely to provoke a communal reaction because the perpetrators are not visible or identifiable. There are also convenient external elements to blame owing to the long history of terrorism from across the borders. Regular condemnation of India's adversaries for their involvement in terrorism, allows for the population to see the 'other' as a foreigner, not a local Muslim. Despite the restrained reactions to these kinds of terrorist attacks in the last one-year, this is a worrisome development. The terrorists seem to be testing the patience and resilience of the government while the government too, in its failed attempts to end these attacks is testing the patience of the people. The Indian public and the government have demonstrated tremendous ability to absorb these attacks against their society. This can last only as long as the entire India nation remains committed to the multicultural, tolerant society. This will require all parts to unite, as happened during the Danish cartoon controversy, and make clear that Indians of all faiths will not tolerate attacks on their fellow countrymen, from any segment of this vast society. A misconception of the terrorists is visible when they equate attacks on India and the Indian government with attacks on Hindu places of worship, thereby undermining the secular ethos of the country. This has to be dispelled by a unified response and condemnation across religions and cultures in the country. (Swati Parashar is a Visiting Research Analyst with the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, (IDSS), NTU, Singapore . She can be contacted at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) -- This is ZESTGlobal. Post articles on international affairs to [email protected] If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTGlobal by sending a blank mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/join/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
