The Social Insecurity:
(Response to an article by Architect Himanshu Burte on Planetizen Dec.. 2008)
Mr. Burte has raised some pertinent questions about a nation's response to terrorists attack like the one on 26th November in Mumbai, India.
His comment, "..aggressive response which would obviously play into the hands of the masterminds of the terror.." probably indicates his aversion to a ‘tit for tat' reaction , though such a response may become necessary to ascertain and declare a nation's resolve to uphold its sovereignty and independence. If "..the attacks were clearly meant to be a provocation.." does he imply that Indians should not allow themselves to be "provoked" even after " ..a cosmopolitan area, home to19 million people and also the financial and entertainment capital of India was shaken.. "?
One would agree with him that "closing roads" etc. is a theatrical response that achieves little except causing inconvenience to the citizen and curbing use of recreational & other amenities. This is a Planner's point of view. But the same theatrical response (like road barriers, sandbags with machine gun totting commandoes etc) can help to instill a sense of security (even if false) and being "under protection" to the common citizens. Is it not as important?
No amount of security precautions and what Mr. Burte calls "theatrical responses" can resolve the problem because a terrorist is a "dedicated' and fanatical individual who knows that he will not live through his suicidal mission. The only possible remedy is to have a very strong and intensive intelligence net work. to fore warn an impending strike .
He states further "..war makes practical sense when you believe that you will cause more damage across the border.." We have to take into consideration the geo-political realities in the subcontinent. Despite its subdivision in to two nations of Pakistan & India in 1947, the former has never accepted the realities, not being able to overcome the hangover of the Mughal empire that ruled India before the British.. With that hangover, Pakistan, since 1947, has waged 5 wars with India, of its own making and lost all of them most ignominiously! Despite its religious fanaticism it has the sense to appreciate that a nuclear war with India may destroy part of India but will physically annihilate Pakistan completely. So, what could be an option?
When examined in this perspective we should realize that what happened in Mumbai in November was not a random terrorist attack by a group (as is the case in many European countries like Germany, Spain, etc.) but a "Trial Run" of a state sponsored undeclared war ! If, just 10 well trained commandoes can hold a city of 19 million in terror why antagonize the whole world by waging a conventional war? Such a terror war instills a fear psychosis amongst the urban populace, shakes their confidence in its elected government. and creates doubts in the entire system of democracy and democratic governance! That is the objective of such attacks by a terror state like Pakistan.
We need to realize and understand these geopolitical realities in the Indian subcontinent
(which are unique and quite different from any where in the world except those that exist between Israel and its neighbors) before starting on a quest for planning solutions to terror threats in our Metropolitan areas.
Prakash M Apte
Urban Development Consultant