By Ramtanu Maitra
The Nov 26-29 siege by terrorists of two top Mumbai hotels and the Nariman House, where a Jewish group had its residence and office, not only resulted in the deaths of more than 200 individuals, but made clear that India, like the United States, is one of the prime targets of Dope, Inc. The questions remain: Who exactly were the terrorists? What were their objectives? And, were any of their objectives attained through this dastardly act?
New Delhi must realize that if the Mumbai attack is to be the last big one, it must carry out a thorough investigation. The Mumbai terror had a very strong British link as is detailed below. On Dec. 1, the London Daily Mail reported that seven British Muslims were involved. That number dwindled to two within a couple of days. The now-deposed chief minister of the state of Maharashtra (where Mumbai is located), Vilasrao Deshmukh, announced that no British Muslims were involved. In other words, whitewashing is fully in progress.
But, it is likely that the evidence of British involvement in this terrorist act has not yet been wiped out. That is why, in the early morning of Dec. 14, Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown came pell-mell to Delhi to urge the Indian Premier Manmohan Singh to allow British intelligence, MI6, to interrogate the only surviving Mumbai terrorist, Mohammed Ajmal Amir Qasab. It is likely that the purpose of the MI6 interrogation is to direct Qasab to provide details to confuse the investigators and keep Britain out of it. The speed with which the British Embassy in Delhi set up the Brown-Singh meeting indicates that there is much at stake for Britain.
As far as the attack itself is concerned, in addition to the three structures mentioned above, the terrorists also fired random shots at the main Mumbai railway station, Victoria Terminus, Cama Hospital, and the Metro cinema. They also killed at least two top Mumbai police officers, including the head of the Anti-Terrorist Squad (ATS) of the state of Maharashtra, Hemant Karkare. The operation surely had a strong input from local allies of the terrorists. From the outset it was evident that the former Mumbai mafioso, Dawood Ibrahim, who now lives under Pakistani ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) protection in Karachi, allowed his network to set up the attack. Ibrahim, a gangster who smuggled gold from Dubai, U.A.E., a British-controlled area, and later drugs, lives under threat of extradition to India.
Dawood has no choice but to deliver information, or be sent back to India, where he would be hanged. Ibrahim also runs drugs—opium and heroin—from Afghanistan, through Dubai. This operation helps the City of London, through the offshore banks located in former British colonies, to generate some real money.
The Times of India reported on Dec. 18, that Moscow, which has been sharing intelligence with India, “believes that Dawood’s drug network, which runs through Afghanistan, was used to finance the Mumbai attack.” According to Russia’s federal anti-narcotics service director Viktor Ivanov, in an interview to the government daily Rossiskaya Gazeta, the evidence shows that “regional drug baron Ibrahim had provided his logistics network for preparing and carrying out the Mumbai terror attacks.” Ivanov added that the attacks were a vivid example of how the illegal drug trafficking networks are used to carry out terror activities.
The Anomalies Although many are trying to sidetrack the investigation of this massive terrorist act, by pushing the idea that it is yet “another clear case of Pakistani terrorism against India,” there exist a number of anomalies, which suggest a different direction. To begin with, the targets that the terrorists picked were highly visible, and the three-day siege that they carried ut provided ample opportunity to the scores of TV and other media to broadcast the carnage all over India and the rest of the world.
Mumbai is India’s commercial center, similar to what New York City represents for the United States. The attack on the top-of-the-line hotels, where businessmen and tourists stay, was clearly aimed at jeopardizing Mumbai’s commercial activities.
On the other hand, Mumbai has three major government- owned installations: First, the Bhabha Atomic Research Center (BARC), where fundamental nuclear research and diagnostic work is carried out, is located a few miles outside the city. There is also the Mazagaon Dock where India’s naval ships and submarines are built; and Mumbai is also the headquarters of the Western Command. The terrorists bypassed the government installations, in favor of the highly visible public targets.
The second anomaly is the killing of the ATS chief Karkare and two of his colleagues, encounter specialist Vijay Salaskar and Additional Commissioner of Police Ashok Kamte. For openers, it was noted that prior to his death, Karkare was unearthing a terror network. His investigation began by tracing the motorcycle used to plant bombs in Malegaon, a textile mill town with a heavy Muslim population, located near Mumbai, in September 2008, to a Hindu Sadhvi (a female Sadhu, or yogi), Pragyasingh Thakur. In a cellphone conversation between Thakur and Ramji, the man who planted the bombs, Thakur asked why more people had not been killed. This is the first time that the Indian state was conducting a thorough professional probe into a terror network involving Hindu extremist organizations.
In addition, the versions of the deaths of Karkare and his colleagues that have appeared in the news media kept changing. According to one reporter, as described by police constable Arun Jadhav, Karkare, Salaskar, Kamte, a driver, and four constables, including himself, were driving down the alley from Victoria Terminus to the back entrance of Cama hospital (at most, a ten-minute drive) to check on injured police officer Sadanand Date, when two gunmen emerged from behind trees by the left side of the road and sprayed the vehicle with bullets, killing all its passengers except Jadhav. No one is saying who directed Karkare and his colleagues to the site where they were killed. From the statements made by state authorities, it is evident that this second anomaly will not be investigated.
The Objectives An event as big as this often contains more than one objective, and involves many players, engaged over a long period of time. While there is no question that the terrorists who came from outside India came through Pakistan, and were residents of Pakistan, there is also no doubt that these terrorists were “ably” supported by a network that exists within India.
The objectives of the terrorists, and the timing of the attack, were predicated on the massive upheaval that has been in progress in Pakistan for years. However, the ultimate objective, because of the international nature of the terrorists, was to use the opportunity, provided by the instability in Pakistan, to undermine India.
To begin with, the Pakistani interest is an important one. This may not be in the interest of Islamabad, but is definitely in the interest of a powerful section that functions underneath Pakistan’s broken-down security network. This section consists of a faction of the ISI and some former Army officers. They had long been in league with various jihadi groups, such as Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Muhammad, Sipahi Sahaba, et al. In fact, all these terrorist groups were armed And trained by this faction as irregular warriors against India. Since 9/11, these jihadis, and newly recruited ones, have included the United States in its pantheon of top enemies.
Over the last period, when President Pervez Musharraf was in power, this faction was gaining ground. Musharraf, balancing on a tightrope, had managed to keep both President Bush and the jihadis happy. This situation lasted much longer than it should have, but eventually Washington realized the problem and tried to bring in someone, such as Benazir Bhutto, who would fight the jihadis with the help of that faction of the Army and the ISI, who are pro-United States, and
not anti-India.
Although Dope, Inc. managed to assassinate Bhutto, the power that controls things in Islamabad, at least as of Nov. 26, is such a pro-U.S., not anti-India group, led by President Zardari (the weakest link), Chief of Armed Services Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, and ISI chief Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha.
This triumvirate, in addition to saying publicly that India is not an “enemy nation,” has provided U.S. and NATO troops with qualitatively improved intelligence in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), where thousands of jihadis, with opportunists of all varieties, are waging war, primarily to defeat the U.S. and NATO, but also for the purpose of breaking up Pakistan. Dope, Inc. is providing the necessary help to these militants. The improved intelligence provided by Islamabad in recent weeks has resulted in helping U.S./NATO troops to pinpoint their targets within the FATA. Because of the availability of such improved intelligence, U.S. troops have killed very few innocents (“collateral damage”) within the FATA over the last five to six weeks.
As the jihadis, and their faction within the ISI and the former Army officers, were being weakened by this development, they decided to ease pressure on the western front by creating a war-like situation against India with an extremely visible, and slow-developing attack on India’s commercial center. The criminals had two objectives: They wanted to ease pressure on the western front, in anticipation of an Indian counterattack. In fact, on Dec 2, Pakistan’s mass - circulation Urdu-language newspaper Roznama Jang reported that the Indian Air Force might be planning an attack on the town of Muridke, the headquarters of the banned militant organization LeT, believed to have provided the terrorists who attacked Mumbai. On Dec 1, Roznama Jang reported that several key Taliban commanders had offered to assist the Pakistani Army in the event of any likely Indian attack on Pakistan with 15,000 fighters. In return, Pakistani Army officials have called the Taliban commanders “Pakistani patriots.”
The second objective was to rile up India’s “Hindu fanatics” against the Muslims. According to the Islamic jihadists, and the opportunists (such as the Afghan militant Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who works hand-in-glove with the jihadists, and a number of intelligence agencies, including the ISI, MI6, and Saudi intelligence), India must identify itself as a “Hindu” nation. That would then justify the establishment of an Islamic Ummah throughout the Arabian Peninsula, Iraq, Central Asia, and the Indian Subcontinent. These jihadists abhor sovereign nation-states. In their book, there exist only Christian nations, a Jewish nation, and a “Hindu” nation.
According to these foot soldiers, and their controllers, a “Hindu” India will be divided invisibly between some 850 million Hindus, who will openly undermine the rights of 160 million Muslims, creating a situation of permanent conflict. This would stymie India’s growth, weaken India’s potential, and deal a serious blow to all hopes of India emerging as a major power.
The Fallout
The fallout from Mumbai has yet to play out fully. On the other hand, New Delhi had been extra careful to avoid mobilizing troops along the Pakistan borders, or in moving inside Pakistan to knock off the terrorist camps. Although New Delhi is exerting pressure on Islamabad to respond positively, so that such a terrorist act is not repeated, it has restrained forces within from heating up the situation through jingoism.
While the jihadis, and their masters, have failed to rile up the “Hindu” faction within India, they have driven the Zardari leadership into a corner. Zardari has shown no inclination to broaden the investigation, and has reiterated, again and again, that the terrorists came from outside. He has made no effort to identify, or bring to justice, that faction that exists on the periphery of Pakistan’s powers-that-be, and continues to call the shots on Pakistan’s relations with India.
The weakening of the Zardari government has begun, and it is a only matter of time before the “advantage” that the U.S./NATO troops now enjoy will be lost. With no political base, Zardari is extremely vulnerable. Moreover, his government can easily be brought down from London, where the MI6-controlled Mohajir Qaum Movement (MQM) leader, Altaf Hussain, resides. MQM, a perennial enemy of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), had thrown his support to Zardari to secure a majority in the National Assembly and form a government. It was London that made this government, and it is London that can undo it. In the interim, the jihadis will continue to gain ground, and Pakistan’s western front will become virtually anarchic, before it breaks up.
Meanwhile, the United States has given four names of former ISI officials, including Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Hamid Gul, to the UN Security Council to be added to the list of international terrorists. Gul was director-general of the ISI from 1987 to 1989, at the end of a mujahideen war, covertly funded by the United States and Saudi Arabia, to drive the Soviet Army out of Afghanistan. Gul has called Washington’s bluff, saying he would prove his innocence before the International Court of Justice. Those who are aware of Hamid Gul’s activities over the years, know that he controls a section of the faction that ran the Mumbai operation, and they also know that Gul has dossiers on CIA and MI6 illegal drug- and gun-running operations, going back to his association with these agencies in the early 1980s. That would make it difficult for international intelligence agencies to put Gul in the dock.
Why India?
Did India provide soldiers to either Iraq or Afghanistan? No. Then, why has India become the target of the jihadis? India’s 160 million Muslims strongly oppose jihad, and have integrated with the rest of the population of various castes and creed. Then, why has India been targetted?
To find the answer to this, and prevent future attacks, New Delhi must accept the fact that there were international forces, which control and nurture the jihadis, and which have used these terrorist elements to attack India. Some of these terrorist elements, such as the Lashkar-e-Toiba, considered widely as the key group which provided the manpower in the Mumbai attack, is also used by the same Dope, Inc. against Russia in Chechnya, against China in Xinjiang, and in Somalia, to name just a few.
Besides the Pakistani jihadis, who are mere foot soldiers ready to lay down their lives for the cause of jihad, it is Britain that had, all along, been trying to break up India. Beginning in 1948, after breaking up India into two nations, the British moved in at the United Nations to undermine the acceptance letter of Maharaja of Kashmir, Hari Singh, to join the Indian Union. The objective of the British then, joined by the Americans a little later, was to have a three-way plebiscite in order to create an independent Kashmir bordering India, China, and Pakistan. Much later, a similar attempt, through an extreme level of violence, was launched from London to create an independent Khalistan in India’s Punjab, north of Delhi and adjoining the disputed Kashmir. None of these efforts bore fruit, but that does not mean the British colonial establishment (in fact, there does not exist any other establishment within Britain) will allow India to grow, prosper, and become a powerful nation. For the same reason, Britain undermines Chinese sovereignty, but because Britain held India as its colony for almost 200 years, it has enormous built-in capabilities to maintain assets that could weaken India.
Londonistan
In addition, there is no gainsaying that most of the mosques in Britain harbor jihadis who operated in the Balkans in the 1990s, and are now operating in this area. Volumes have been written about the British harboring of Islamic terrorists through its intelligence networks. Britain also harbors other terrorists; for example, it is a safe haven for the LTTE (the separatist Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka), which raises funds and lobbies politicians to promote and propagate LTTE terrorism.
Despite being banned in the U.K., LTTE’s former ideologue, the late Anton Balasingham, was living in London, thanks to the generosity and hospitality of successive U.K. governments. His wife, Adele, who was once the head of the Women Suicide Cadre, is still living in London, presumably influencing British politicians. Despite repeated protests from anti-LTTE organizations, among them Sinhalese, moderate Tamils, and Muslims, a newly formed front called the British Tamil Forum recently organized the Mahaveer Day (Heroes Day) with pomp and glory, and the attendance of some Labor, Liberal, and Independent Members of Parliament. The MPs who participated and spoke at the celebration of the LTTE’s brutal terrorist leader Prabhakaran’s birthday were Edward Davey (Liberal Democrat), Siobhain McDonagh (Labour), John McDonnell (Labour), Andrew Pelling (Independent), Joan Ryan (Labour), and Virendra Sharma (Labour). The British have historically played havoc with Islamic groups. To begin with, the British created Pakistan, re-drew the maps in Arabia, and through the Sykes-Picot Treaty, became the controllers of most Islamic nations.
Additionally, the Britain-headquartered Tablighi Jamaat, perhaps the largest Islamic “teaching organization,” was named for the Bali bombings in 2006. The organization—influenced by a branch of Saudi Arabian Islam known as Wahhabism—has already been linked to two of the July 7 London suicide bombers who attended a Tablighi mosque at the organization’s headquarters in Dewsbury, in northeast England. The jailed shoe-bomber Richard Reid is also known to have attended Tablighi meetings.
Take the case of the Hizbut Tahrir (HT), an extremely active and dangerous Islamic group also headquartered in Britain. HT is funded by various Saudi charities, and is most active in Central Asia. Another preachers’ group, openly promoting a worldwide Islamic Caliphate from the mosques of Britain, HT is ostensibly a non-gun-carrying group. But, at the same time, one of the most violent terrorist groups that function in Central Asia, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), recruits exclusively from the HT. HT is also active in Chechnya, although its headquarters are in Old Brompton Road in London.
On Dec. 1, HT had a day-long event in Lahore, Pakistan. In that seminar, a British Muslim, Naveed Butt, said: “. . . The time has come that the people of power, fulfilling their responsibility, provide Nusrah [material support] to the Hizb so that Islam may be implemented and the Ummah should be unified under a single leadership.” Yes, the event took place in Pakistan, but it was run by the London-headquartered HT, funded by Saudi Arabian charities.
Although Indian authorities demur (ostensibly in order to avoid embarrassing Britain) in accusing Britain in connection with terrorist attacks, Indians in general agree that very little good has come out of Britain of late, and recognize that its “divide-and-rule” policy was the keystone in setting up its Empire.
Take, for instance, Indian Premier Singh’s demand that Britain hand over 14 terrorists, who had committed attacks in India, and were harbored in Britain. Representing a nation of 1 billion people, Singh made that demand, in person, to then-British Prime Minister Tony Blair, in St. Petersburg, Russia, in 2006. His demand was ignored, and the Indians quietly, without making a fuss, swallowed the insult.
But, the story does not end there. On Nov. 26, the very day the Mumbai attack began, the Indian Express, reported that a Briton, Mohammed Raheel Ataur Rehman Sheikh, who was accused of funding the July 11, 2006 serial explosions in a Mumbai train that claimed more than 200 lives, had been detained by the authorities in England. Raheel Sheikh was reportedly picked up by the authorities in Britain on the basis of an Interpol Red Corner Notice (RCN) issued against him. Sheikh is also an operative of the Lashkar-e-Toiba group, considered the foot soldiers in the Mumbai attack.
India News, citing a source report, said Raheel was picked up from Birmingham a few weeks before. On Nov. 10, Interpol contacted the CBI (India’s Central Bureau of Investigation) seeking details behind the Red Corner Notice against Sheikh. However, the latest reports indicate that he has been released, and remains in England.
Obstacles to a Thorough Investigation
A thorough investigation of the Mumbai massacre is the only way to prevent another such attack. But there are obstacles to carrying out such an investigation. To begin with, because of its 190-year old colonial link in India, Britain has succeeded in developing an Angophile Indian upper-income class, which would not hesitate to endanger the nation’s security to protect Britain’s “good name.” The long Cold War years allowed India’s “left-leaning” elites, to use every possible platform to attack “Anglo-American” interests. What they really meant always was American interests. In addition, many in the upper classes were educated in Britain, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh included. Many of these have also served the Anglo-Dutch Libera financial system through their tenures at the IMF (the Prime Minister included), and have become promoters of free trade (the British East India Company’s trademark lethal weapon to pauperize the colonies), and globalization. These individuals see Britain as a friend, America as a threat, and Pakistan as the real enemy.
This is what threatens the lives of India’s 1 billion people.
This article first appeared in the Executive Intelligence Review, a news weekly published from Washington DC
Showing posts with label mumbai. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mumbai. Show all posts
Is Patriotic Journalism different from Real Journalism?
By Prem Prakash
Hamid Mir, Editor of Islamabad based Geo TV Channel of Pakistan who had confirmed the fact that Ajmal Amir Kasab, the lone terrorist captured in Mumbai during the terrorists attacks on November 26, was indeed from Pakistan, was asked a question by the students of journalism in Lahore to explain the difference between patriotic journalism and real journalism?
This is one question that is being raised in India as well following the manner in which reporting of Mumbai mayhem was handled by the Indian Media.
India Media allegedly went overboard in reporting the happenings in Mumbai live and round the clock for three days continuously. To keep the viewers glued to the screens the reporting had to have a good mix of emotion. The terrorists and their country - Pakistan -- had to be bashed.
After the coverage was almost over, question was asked as to whether live reporting helped the terrorists to achieve their objectives? Did the security forces suffer because of the live telecast?
To many it seemed that whatever way one called it, "patriotic journalism" or "real journalism", the coverage during the crucial three days helped the terrorists. Did plain and simple journalism become a casualty?
One has to accept that the proliferation of Media globally has led to severe cut throat competition, particularly among the 24 hour TV News Channels. Everyone wants to be first to break the news. And to stay first they need to remain live
The events in Mumbai put a severe strain on the news channels. Each channel had to deploy all its reporters irrespective of the fact whether they were trained for such assignments. The seniors in the newsrooms had to depend on young reporters and cameramen. For many of them the Mumbai mayhem was too overwhelming.
My mind went back to the manner in which the American Channels had reported 9/11 events and the British channels the 7/7 attacks in London. I was in London when the events 7/7 attacks occurred. Both in the United States and London, the TV Channels reported the events live, but they were restrained. In London no one came in the way of the police and waited for a proper briefing by the Metropolitan Police Chief in the late afternoon after he had gathered the facts.
In Mumbai it seemed every one was on his own. You could get any person on the street to comment and push a mike in the face of any policeman or the nearest officer. Media was not to blame for all this. The police had failed to place a forensic cordon and even when it was put, the reason given out was that the authorities wanted to keep the Media away from the harm's way!
The spokesman of the Government, both Central and State, were nowhere is the scene to guide the media during the events in Mumbai. Where was the Spokesman of the Mumbai Police? The Commanders of the Naval commandoes, the area commander of the Army, told their side of the story as the operations were continuing. The head of the National Security Guard briefed the press when the whole operations were over. . Over the years these press departments of the state government have learnt to work more for their Ministers than the government of the state. No wonder they were absent and not liasing with the Media at all.
It was evident to one and all in the very first hour of Mumbai terror attack that it was going to be a long haul. Why did the Press Information Bureau of the Government of India fail to get there first thing in the morning to help the media to report events that had impact worldwide? What was the Defence Press Relations doing both in Mumbai and Delhi when they were aware that army and Navy had moved into the area?
We saw the " parachute journalists" arrive in Mumbai from all over the world overnight to cover the events. Very rightly so; after all many nationalities were targets of the terrorist commandos. One expected some body from the Foreign Office to be present in Mumbai. One heard in dismay the BBC reporting the mayhem by terrorists being called the "militant attack" on Mumbai!
The Chief Minister and his Home Minister of Maharashtra sat in their offices to pronounce that "such incidents do happen in big cities".
Thus, in the absence of any authoritative briefing what we had from Mumbai was neither "patriotic journalism" nor "real journalism", but a lot of breast beating by emotionally charged individuals and reporters.
Pakistan is being monitored by world powers, and the information gathered has indicated the involvement of Pakistani forces - what President Zardari called 'non-state actors' in the Mumbai mayhem. The military - jehadi nexus in Pakistan has been in existence for nearly two decades now. The Mumbai attacks took over a year for planning and execution, which was not in the knowledge of the civilian government there. A repetition of Kargil.
Truth about who carried out the terrorist attacks in Mumbai would not have been known had it not been for the capture of Ajmal Amir Kasab. Pakistan's military -jehadi nexus is a threat not just to nascent civilian rule in Pakistan but to the whole world.
The question of "patriotic journalism" has been raised in Pakistan because the army and jehadi elements in that country want to equate the attack on Mumbai as a war like issue between India and Pakistan. . Therefore Pakistani patriots must stand against India and the media toe the national line in defence of the country.
If any journalist attempts to bring out the truth as was done by Hamid Mir, then according to the protagonists of "patriotic journalism" in Pakistan he should be ready for 'retribution' - and treated as a traitor in a nation at war
There is no place for "real journalism" in Pakistan as propounded by Hamid Mir. The real rulers in Pakistan forget that journalism simply requires honest presentation of the facts as known to a reporter or as captured by a cameraman.
Here in India we need to watch that the very high reputation of Indian journalism is not sullied by enthusiastic youngsters or high-pitched emotional commentators. Get your facts and present them in a sober manner so that the people of India are helped in understanding an issue and making up their mind.
As a fellow commentator wrote recently whether India and Pakistan go to war or not, the Media of the two countries are perhaps already at war. Is this the situation that the Media of the two countries should be in? It is time that serious practitioners of the profession move in and take charge.
(The author of this article is Chairman of ANI, was active field journalist, member of the Central Press Accreditation Committee for several years, among the founders of National Union of Journalists and President of the TV Programme Producers Guild of India)
ANI
Hamid Mir, Editor of Islamabad based Geo TV Channel of Pakistan who had confirmed the fact that Ajmal Amir Kasab, the lone terrorist captured in Mumbai during the terrorists attacks on November 26, was indeed from Pakistan, was asked a question by the students of journalism in Lahore to explain the difference between patriotic journalism and real journalism?
This is one question that is being raised in India as well following the manner in which reporting of Mumbai mayhem was handled by the Indian Media.
India Media allegedly went overboard in reporting the happenings in Mumbai live and round the clock for three days continuously. To keep the viewers glued to the screens the reporting had to have a good mix of emotion. The terrorists and their country - Pakistan -- had to be bashed.
After the coverage was almost over, question was asked as to whether live reporting helped the terrorists to achieve their objectives? Did the security forces suffer because of the live telecast?
To many it seemed that whatever way one called it, "patriotic journalism" or "real journalism", the coverage during the crucial three days helped the terrorists. Did plain and simple journalism become a casualty?
One has to accept that the proliferation of Media globally has led to severe cut throat competition, particularly among the 24 hour TV News Channels. Everyone wants to be first to break the news. And to stay first they need to remain live
The events in Mumbai put a severe strain on the news channels. Each channel had to deploy all its reporters irrespective of the fact whether they were trained for such assignments. The seniors in the newsrooms had to depend on young reporters and cameramen. For many of them the Mumbai mayhem was too overwhelming.
My mind went back to the manner in which the American Channels had reported 9/11 events and the British channels the 7/7 attacks in London. I was in London when the events 7/7 attacks occurred. Both in the United States and London, the TV Channels reported the events live, but they were restrained. In London no one came in the way of the police and waited for a proper briefing by the Metropolitan Police Chief in the late afternoon after he had gathered the facts.
In Mumbai it seemed every one was on his own. You could get any person on the street to comment and push a mike in the face of any policeman or the nearest officer. Media was not to blame for all this. The police had failed to place a forensic cordon and even when it was put, the reason given out was that the authorities wanted to keep the Media away from the harm's way!
The spokesman of the Government, both Central and State, were nowhere is the scene to guide the media during the events in Mumbai. Where was the Spokesman of the Mumbai Police? The Commanders of the Naval commandoes, the area commander of the Army, told their side of the story as the operations were continuing. The head of the National Security Guard briefed the press when the whole operations were over. . Over the years these press departments of the state government have learnt to work more for their Ministers than the government of the state. No wonder they were absent and not liasing with the Media at all.
It was evident to one and all in the very first hour of Mumbai terror attack that it was going to be a long haul. Why did the Press Information Bureau of the Government of India fail to get there first thing in the morning to help the media to report events that had impact worldwide? What was the Defence Press Relations doing both in Mumbai and Delhi when they were aware that army and Navy had moved into the area?
We saw the " parachute journalists" arrive in Mumbai from all over the world overnight to cover the events. Very rightly so; after all many nationalities were targets of the terrorist commandos. One expected some body from the Foreign Office to be present in Mumbai. One heard in dismay the BBC reporting the mayhem by terrorists being called the "militant attack" on Mumbai!
The Chief Minister and his Home Minister of Maharashtra sat in their offices to pronounce that "such incidents do happen in big cities".
Thus, in the absence of any authoritative briefing what we had from Mumbai was neither "patriotic journalism" nor "real journalism", but a lot of breast beating by emotionally charged individuals and reporters.
Pakistan is being monitored by world powers, and the information gathered has indicated the involvement of Pakistani forces - what President Zardari called 'non-state actors' in the Mumbai mayhem. The military - jehadi nexus in Pakistan has been in existence for nearly two decades now. The Mumbai attacks took over a year for planning and execution, which was not in the knowledge of the civilian government there. A repetition of Kargil.
Truth about who carried out the terrorist attacks in Mumbai would not have been known had it not been for the capture of Ajmal Amir Kasab. Pakistan's military -jehadi nexus is a threat not just to nascent civilian rule in Pakistan but to the whole world.
The question of "patriotic journalism" has been raised in Pakistan because the army and jehadi elements in that country want to equate the attack on Mumbai as a war like issue between India and Pakistan. . Therefore Pakistani patriots must stand against India and the media toe the national line in defence of the country.
If any journalist attempts to bring out the truth as was done by Hamid Mir, then according to the protagonists of "patriotic journalism" in Pakistan he should be ready for 'retribution' - and treated as a traitor in a nation at war
There is no place for "real journalism" in Pakistan as propounded by Hamid Mir. The real rulers in Pakistan forget that journalism simply requires honest presentation of the facts as known to a reporter or as captured by a cameraman.
Here in India we need to watch that the very high reputation of Indian journalism is not sullied by enthusiastic youngsters or high-pitched emotional commentators. Get your facts and present them in a sober manner so that the people of India are helped in understanding an issue and making up their mind.
As a fellow commentator wrote recently whether India and Pakistan go to war or not, the Media of the two countries are perhaps already at war. Is this the situation that the Media of the two countries should be in? It is time that serious practitioners of the profession move in and take charge.
(The author of this article is Chairman of ANI, was active field journalist, member of the Central Press Accreditation Committee for several years, among the founders of National Union of Journalists and President of the TV Programme Producers Guild of India)
ANI
No Gossip, No Politics with Terrorism Please…
Labels:
mumbai,
security,
terror
0
comments
"26/11 terror strike in Mumbai drew international attention and the act was severely condemned by leaders of most countries. But in the land where it happened, the leaders tried to churn political benefits by blaming each other and fooling people. Leaders of every political party – from the self-claimed nationalists to the extreme regionalists – saw the issue of terrorism on their own political canvass and started a tug-of-war in the name of national security."
By Basudev Mahapatra
The 26/11 terror attack in Mumbai not only warned India how vulnerable it is to terrorism, but also it exposed the easy going attitude of India’s sleepy intelligence system that couldn’t smell possibility of such an attack even though it had received some inputs about it and was warned by foreign agencies well before. The attack brought to the notice of public how the loud anti-terrorist measures in the country are nothing but for the name shake and how, technically and skill wise, our anti-terrorist squads (ATS) are much behind to deal with the current trends and practices of terrorism world over.
Few terrorists landed up at Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminal (CST) in Mumbai on November 26 evening with an intention to kill as much of people and cause as much of damage they could. Even though the security personnel present there traced them and tried to face them, they were not equipped enough to deal with the terrorists armed with sophisticated weapons and ammunitions.
On information of presence of some armed terrorists in the city, Mumbai ATS took over the operation but grossly failed in nabbing or killing the terrorists to give the city a quick breath of relief but lost some of its most effective members. The reason, as placed by our leaders and the senior police officials, was that the ATS jawans were less equipped than the terrorists. Soon the National Security Guard (NSG) Commandoes had to take over and gun down the terrorists who took three important establishments of Mumbai like Nariman House, Oberoi Hotel and Tajmahal Hotel Buildings. It’s not only the city of Mumbai, but the whole country felt terrorised for about 60 hours till the ‘operation black tornado’ (as the NSG chief termed the operation) was successfully accomplished.
The terror attack and the subsequent operation to free the establishments from the terrorists brought to public many systemic flaws in the defence system of India and political leaders’ urge to politicise such act of terrorism. When the whole nation was stunned with the terror attack in Mumbai, the political leaders seemed easy responding to the incident before media.
The attack made it clear that how ineffective our intelligence and internal security systems are in gathering information on such possibilities and getting control over the situation and the miscreants on such incidence. It was very unfortunate to see the union home minister Sree Prakash Jaiswal talking on TV that the government now realises the necessity of upgrading its defence force and the security agencies to face the challenges from terrorists of the present scale. When terrorism has become a global problem and, in the attacks on WTC and London railway, terrorists have shown how equipped and ruthless they could be, home ministers great realisation seemed to be a hard slap on the face of Indians who have placed these leaders on the chairs to rule.
26/11 terror strike in Mumbai drew international attention and the act was severely condemned by leaders of most countries. But in the land where it happened, the leaders tried to churn political benefits by blaming each other and fooling people. Leaders of every political party – from the self-claimed nationalists to the extreme regionalists – saw the issue of terrorism on their own political canvass and started a tug-of-war in the name of national security. No leader came out of the political and party limits and urged for strong measures and urgent action for combating terrorism. But everybody tried to fulfil its own interest in the recent incident of terrorism n the commercial capital of the country.
One party urged re-execution of POTA, where the other party tried to make afresh the issue of Marathi Manus – North Indian conflict in Mumbai and Maharastra. As elections are on the head, some leaders tried to bag the image of most accountable by politically guillotining few ministers at almost the end of their tenure. Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil resigned from the cabinet making himself accountable for what happened in Mumbai. But Mr. Patil, where was your sense of accountability during serial blasts in Delhi and Rajasthan? Where was your sense of accountability during the violence against north Indians in Mumbai and Assam?
It seems, the resignation of union home minister is motivated by the possibility of sympathy in the coming general election more than his sense of true accountability to the nation and the society. However, Mr. Patil’s resignation became the true guillotine for Maharastra Chief Minister Bilash Rao Desmukh and His Deputy R. R. Patil who had to vacate their berths immediately against their will.
In only two days after the city was made free from terror, the situation turned into a political drama. People came forward to blame and scold the political leaders to be caught by TV camera.
Instead of disseminating the whole incident and operation in the form of pure information, the media, in toto, engaged itself in blaming the politicians, the system and even created further panic by explaining some hypothetical concepts of terror attack based upon apprehensions and unsupported or indirectly hinted by some sources.
The reports of WTC and London tube rail blasts aired on American and British Channels must be taken as examples here. Their media also reported the incidents live, but more ethically, more responsibly as the media of a nation. They would be equally allured by TRP, but not at the cost of ethics, the people and the nation. They never imposed a conclusive statement in any of their reports but just carried the views of the designated government official and authority of the investigating agencies. But our media made lots of conclusive statements from its own even though based upon information from certain sources. The Mumbai Terror strike dominated the TV screen for over double the time it continued, as no other news beyond it was as saleable as the live coverage from the site of terror.
Indian media could have taken a more responsible role by holding public reaction on the small screen and pressurising the government at the centre and the state come up with a strong law against any kind of terrorism in the country – be it by internal or external or supported by any external terrorist organisation.
Since 1990s till today, India has been the victim of most violent terrorist activities. Every time after an incident of terrorism, India shouts loudly. But it soon forgets the fury by putting the blames on the political leaders. This time also, the fury of terror strike has been diluted in a week. The focus shifted to selection of new CM and his deputy in Maharastrsa. Nobody, including the media and the political parties, is interested in establishing a strong law with provisions of exemplary punishment to those involved in any act of terrorism directly or indirectly. Even after decades of its fight against terrorism, the irony is that India doesn’t have a strong law for quick trial of cases of terrorism and punish the terrorists.
Apart from lingering process of trial, indefinite delay in punishment is also another reason that gives the terrorists a breath of relief. Like in case of the mastermind of Parliament attack Afzal Guru, the country is afraid of executing the punishment that has been sentenced by the Supreme Court since more than five years.
Acting as the media of the nation, Indian Press and Media must act responsibly and create public pressure for quick implementation of a stronger law that can help checking terrorism in the land and keep people and the land free from continuous terrorist attack.
And the political leaders must act as representatives of people than of their own parties. Instead of looking for a political dimension of everything, the leaders must cross their party lines in time such emergencies and work to ensure peace and safety to each and every citizens of the land.
When it is terrorism, people don’t want any gossip or politics from either media or leaders, but what they look for is acting fast and responsibly.
By Basudev Mahapatra
The 26/11 terror attack in Mumbai not only warned India how vulnerable it is to terrorism, but also it exposed the easy going attitude of India’s sleepy intelligence system that couldn’t smell possibility of such an attack even though it had received some inputs about it and was warned by foreign agencies well before. The attack brought to the notice of public how the loud anti-terrorist measures in the country are nothing but for the name shake and how, technically and skill wise, our anti-terrorist squads (ATS) are much behind to deal with the current trends and practices of terrorism world over.
Few terrorists landed up at Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminal (CST) in Mumbai on November 26 evening with an intention to kill as much of people and cause as much of damage they could. Even though the security personnel present there traced them and tried to face them, they were not equipped enough to deal with the terrorists armed with sophisticated weapons and ammunitions.
On information of presence of some armed terrorists in the city, Mumbai ATS took over the operation but grossly failed in nabbing or killing the terrorists to give the city a quick breath of relief but lost some of its most effective members. The reason, as placed by our leaders and the senior police officials, was that the ATS jawans were less equipped than the terrorists. Soon the National Security Guard (NSG) Commandoes had to take over and gun down the terrorists who took three important establishments of Mumbai like Nariman House, Oberoi Hotel and Tajmahal Hotel Buildings. It’s not only the city of Mumbai, but the whole country felt terrorised for about 60 hours till the ‘operation black tornado’ (as the NSG chief termed the operation) was successfully accomplished.
The terror attack and the subsequent operation to free the establishments from the terrorists brought to public many systemic flaws in the defence system of India and political leaders’ urge to politicise such act of terrorism. When the whole nation was stunned with the terror attack in Mumbai, the political leaders seemed easy responding to the incident before media.
The attack made it clear that how ineffective our intelligence and internal security systems are in gathering information on such possibilities and getting control over the situation and the miscreants on such incidence. It was very unfortunate to see the union home minister Sree Prakash Jaiswal talking on TV that the government now realises the necessity of upgrading its defence force and the security agencies to face the challenges from terrorists of the present scale. When terrorism has become a global problem and, in the attacks on WTC and London railway, terrorists have shown how equipped and ruthless they could be, home ministers great realisation seemed to be a hard slap on the face of Indians who have placed these leaders on the chairs to rule.
26/11 terror strike in Mumbai drew international attention and the act was severely condemned by leaders of most countries. But in the land where it happened, the leaders tried to churn political benefits by blaming each other and fooling people. Leaders of every political party – from the self-claimed nationalists to the extreme regionalists – saw the issue of terrorism on their own political canvass and started a tug-of-war in the name of national security. No leader came out of the political and party limits and urged for strong measures and urgent action for combating terrorism. But everybody tried to fulfil its own interest in the recent incident of terrorism n the commercial capital of the country.
One party urged re-execution of POTA, where the other party tried to make afresh the issue of Marathi Manus – North Indian conflict in Mumbai and Maharastra. As elections are on the head, some leaders tried to bag the image of most accountable by politically guillotining few ministers at almost the end of their tenure. Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil resigned from the cabinet making himself accountable for what happened in Mumbai. But Mr. Patil, where was your sense of accountability during serial blasts in Delhi and Rajasthan? Where was your sense of accountability during the violence against north Indians in Mumbai and Assam?
It seems, the resignation of union home minister is motivated by the possibility of sympathy in the coming general election more than his sense of true accountability to the nation and the society. However, Mr. Patil’s resignation became the true guillotine for Maharastra Chief Minister Bilash Rao Desmukh and His Deputy R. R. Patil who had to vacate their berths immediately against their will.
In only two days after the city was made free from terror, the situation turned into a political drama. People came forward to blame and scold the political leaders to be caught by TV camera.
Instead of disseminating the whole incident and operation in the form of pure information, the media, in toto, engaged itself in blaming the politicians, the system and even created further panic by explaining some hypothetical concepts of terror attack based upon apprehensions and unsupported or indirectly hinted by some sources.
The reports of WTC and London tube rail blasts aired on American and British Channels must be taken as examples here. Their media also reported the incidents live, but more ethically, more responsibly as the media of a nation. They would be equally allured by TRP, but not at the cost of ethics, the people and the nation. They never imposed a conclusive statement in any of their reports but just carried the views of the designated government official and authority of the investigating agencies. But our media made lots of conclusive statements from its own even though based upon information from certain sources. The Mumbai Terror strike dominated the TV screen for over double the time it continued, as no other news beyond it was as saleable as the live coverage from the site of terror.
Indian media could have taken a more responsible role by holding public reaction on the small screen and pressurising the government at the centre and the state come up with a strong law against any kind of terrorism in the country – be it by internal or external or supported by any external terrorist organisation.
Since 1990s till today, India has been the victim of most violent terrorist activities. Every time after an incident of terrorism, India shouts loudly. But it soon forgets the fury by putting the blames on the political leaders. This time also, the fury of terror strike has been diluted in a week. The focus shifted to selection of new CM and his deputy in Maharastrsa. Nobody, including the media and the political parties, is interested in establishing a strong law with provisions of exemplary punishment to those involved in any act of terrorism directly or indirectly. Even after decades of its fight against terrorism, the irony is that India doesn’t have a strong law for quick trial of cases of terrorism and punish the terrorists.
Apart from lingering process of trial, indefinite delay in punishment is also another reason that gives the terrorists a breath of relief. Like in case of the mastermind of Parliament attack Afzal Guru, the country is afraid of executing the punishment that has been sentenced by the Supreme Court since more than five years.
Acting as the media of the nation, Indian Press and Media must act responsibly and create public pressure for quick implementation of a stronger law that can help checking terrorism in the land and keep people and the land free from continuous terrorist attack.
And the political leaders must act as representatives of people than of their own parties. Instead of looking for a political dimension of everything, the leaders must cross their party lines in time such emergencies and work to ensure peace and safety to each and every citizens of the land.
When it is terrorism, people don’t want any gossip or politics from either media or leaders, but what they look for is acting fast and responsibly.
Thoughts from Mumbai: A Return to Gandhi’s Dream for India
Labels:
gandhi,
India,
mumbai
0
comments
by Rupa Chinai
- India -
• Many in India call for peace in response to the November 26th terrorist attacks on Mumbai. •In the aftermath of Mumbai’s most recent encounter with terrorism, there is the feeling of isolation felt by those pleading for sense and reason. These voices are being drowned out amidst the jingoism and war cries of an “eye for an eye” currently heard on the streets of the city. In this chilling environment of unreason, I wonder what would be the reaction to people like me, who feel pity for the path chosen by young men like Ajmal Kasab, the only surviving terrorist from the attacks? This sentiment does not seek to justify the heinous crimes he committed or protect him from the punishment he deserves through the due process of law. But how can one find the words to urge people to understand the context from which youth such as Ajmal develop and how civilized society must respond to the challenges they pose?
- India -
• Many in India call for peace in response to the November 26th terrorist attacks on Mumbai. •
The newspapers here have gleaned information from Ajmal’s interrogations in police custody and reveal that he hails from Faridkot village, in the Punjab province of Pakistan. The BBC and Pakistan TV channels have shown Ajmal’s family home, the school where he studied until class four, his father and other villagers who confirmed Ajmal’s links with them. We learned that Ajmal’s training with the Lashkar-e-Taiba (a militant group that seeks the liberation of Indian occupied Kashmir) led to his becoming a crack commando with skills in urban guerrilla warfare. We even know the names of some of the people who trained him.
The Pakistan government responded by bluntly denying Ajmal’s Pakistani nationality, cordoning off Faridkot village and whisking away his family. It has denied Indian government allegations of ISI involvement in terrorist training. This response, apart from inviting Indian ire, has drawn flak from within Pakistan, in particular from Nawaz Sharif, former Pakistan Prime Minister and leader of the opposition.
These reports however, give key insights into how militancy has found a base within Pakistan. They reveal that the militant groups are the only ones imparting skills and professional training to these poor, rural youth, creating illusions of having provided their lives with meaning in an existence otherwise steeped in poverty and misery.
Ajmal has reportedly spoken to the Mumbai police about some of these illusions – he believed that he was on a mission that would earn him a place in jannat (heaven) and in the annals of those who have died for the cause of Islam. He also reportedly said that his sponsors promised to pay Rupees one and a half lakhs (US$3,165) to his family upon completion of his successful suicide mission.
But now from the grave reality of his prison cell, Ajmal has apparently begun to lose some of his swagger and arrogance. We catch glimpses of a young man so typical of those we see in the sub-continent, fascinated by Amitabh Bachhan films and who fancies himself as a hero. It is perhaps this human spark that has kept Ajmal alive when the more hardened of his ilk would swallow a cyanide pill rather than face capture.
As the media tells us about the human face of this terrorist, my thoughts turn to the society that nurtured him. What is one to think of Pakistan’s failure to provide its youth with positive directions, access to skills and a knowledge base that would help them to live meaningful lives? Why did their communities allow mercenaries, masked as men of religion and god, to access their children and brainwash them into the jihad cult?
Meanwhile, are we in India any better off? Do we really believe that hanging terrorists without a trial (because our criminal justice system is imperfect) or arming ourselves with more draconian laws and modern weaponry will make India a safer place? Do we not display our own barbarism every time we question the patriotism of India’s Muslims and attack our minorities? How can we ordinary citizens respond to this situation? Shouldn’t we stop and consider our own unique role? In my mind, this introspection has proven wholly inadequate, and yet represents our only source of real hope. Does the land of Gandhi have nothing more to offer the world as a solution to this situation?
And has our electronic media learned anything from the mistakes made during its coverage of the last terrorist attack? Just a few days ago the Indian government released guidelines for media coverage of terrorist attacks, and yet a Hindi television news channel flouted these norms to grab its latest scoop by broadcasting leaked footage of Ajmal's interrogation by American FBI agents.
With Ajmal’s case now awaiting trial, direct display of his testimony when he has no defense lawyer to guide or protect him, is surely sub judice (under judgment) and prejudicial to the trial. Apart from the impact it could have on public opinion, it could very well pose a grave threat to his safety.
Describing Mumbai’s response in the weeks after the terrorist strike, filmmaker Anand Patwardhan writes, “Terror is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It thrives on reaction, polarization, militarization and thirst for revenge.”
The first victims of this ever-hardening stance are our own neglected and marginalized minorities in rural, tribal and peripheral India. Denied access to justice and blotted out by the media, these alienated sections have turned to violence when they had no other recourse. Without any attempt to listen to their grievances or respect their right to have a dissenting viewpoint and initiate dialogue – an approach that would have won hearts and minds - India has sought to equate them with anti-nationals and terrorists.
Like Kashmir on the western flank, the north-east border states have been engulfed in insurgency and a fratricidal guerilla war since India’s independence. Many of these conflicts are the freedom struggles of small nationalities who believe they have a historical right to determine their own destiny and who have bravely held on to their convictions despite being stamped upon by the might of India. Others have erupted in turmoil and violence because of their neglect by New Delhi, by the loss of their economic, political and cultural identity.
Ordinary people and civil society groups in the north-east, particularly in Nagaland, have often spoken of the need to go beyond New Delhi and reach out to ordinary people in the rest of India. They believe that when there is widespread pressure created by a sensitized Indian public opinion, only then can political solutions begin to emerge. According to my friends who have worked in the region, this plea also comes from the people of Kashmir.
A network of women journalists and writers across India has already mobilized in response to the initiative of young Manipuri women journalists. Early next year, they will attend a meeting in Imphal, Manipur, a state adjoining Burma, where the writ of India simply holds no sway. Its people have lived with urban guerilla warfare for more than a decade and insecurity, extortion, kidnapping and violent death is a daily part of their lives. For most of the visiting journalists, it will be their first visit to this sensitive border area long ignored by mainstream Indian media. It will be an expensive journey and most will spend money from their own pockets because of their deep sense of conviction and desire to learn from the local people.
I hope it will be the first of many such efforts, where we systematically endeavor to include these sections of society, knowing that they in turn have much to teach us about what is important in life. Irrespective of what political solutions evolve for the north-east or Kashmir, we will always remain neighbors and that is a good enough starting point for dialogue. It is through such initiatives that we come back to Gandhi’s dream of an India whose strength lies in its service to its weaker and marginalized populations.
In the present cacophony emanating from Mumbai, thankfully there are some quiet and thoughtful voices calling for ordinary Indians to consider our own minority and marginalized communities. Can we, the privileged Indians - who have skills, education, and a voice - play some role in creating the platforms for dialogue to address common concerns? India is a house divided by caste, class, race, religion and politics, which has made us all vulnerable to attack. Can we create social support systems to deal with their genuine and long suppressed grievances? Will we help our youth find an alternative to violence?
About the Author
Rupa Chinai is an independent journalist based in Mumbai, India. She has been writing on health and development issues for the past 25 years and her work has appeared in some of India's leading English language daily newspapers and websites as well as foreign publications. Her basic education was obtained in Mumbai and opportunities for further studies and exposure came through prestigious awards such as a journalism fellowship from the Harvard School of Public Health in the US, amongst others. She is co-author of a book on rural women's health issues and is currently engaged in writing a book on northeast India, based on 20 years of travel and work in that region.
The Pakistan government responded by bluntly denying Ajmal’s Pakistani nationality, cordoning off Faridkot village and whisking away his family. It has denied Indian government allegations of ISI involvement in terrorist training. This response, apart from inviting Indian ire, has drawn flak from within Pakistan, in particular from Nawaz Sharif, former Pakistan Prime Minister and leader of the opposition.
These reports however, give key insights into how militancy has found a base within Pakistan. They reveal that the militant groups are the only ones imparting skills and professional training to these poor, rural youth, creating illusions of having provided their lives with meaning in an existence otherwise steeped in poverty and misery.
Ajmal has reportedly spoken to the Mumbai police about some of these illusions – he believed that he was on a mission that would earn him a place in jannat (heaven) and in the annals of those who have died for the cause of Islam. He also reportedly said that his sponsors promised to pay Rupees one and a half lakhs (US$3,165) to his family upon completion of his successful suicide mission.
But now from the grave reality of his prison cell, Ajmal has apparently begun to lose some of his swagger and arrogance. We catch glimpses of a young man so typical of those we see in the sub-continent, fascinated by Amitabh Bachhan films and who fancies himself as a hero. It is perhaps this human spark that has kept Ajmal alive when the more hardened of his ilk would swallow a cyanide pill rather than face capture.
As the media tells us about the human face of this terrorist, my thoughts turn to the society that nurtured him. What is one to think of Pakistan’s failure to provide its youth with positive directions, access to skills and a knowledge base that would help them to live meaningful lives? Why did their communities allow mercenaries, masked as men of religion and god, to access their children and brainwash them into the jihad cult?
Meanwhile, are we in India any better off? Do we really believe that hanging terrorists without a trial (because our criminal justice system is imperfect) or arming ourselves with more draconian laws and modern weaponry will make India a safer place? Do we not display our own barbarism every time we question the patriotism of India’s Muslims and attack our minorities? How can we ordinary citizens respond to this situation? Shouldn’t we stop and consider our own unique role? In my mind, this introspection has proven wholly inadequate, and yet represents our only source of real hope. Does the land of Gandhi have nothing more to offer the world as a solution to this situation?
And has our electronic media learned anything from the mistakes made during its coverage of the last terrorist attack? Just a few days ago the Indian government released guidelines for media coverage of terrorist attacks, and yet a Hindi television news channel flouted these norms to grab its latest scoop by broadcasting leaked footage of Ajmal's interrogation by American FBI agents.
With Ajmal’s case now awaiting trial, direct display of his testimony when he has no defense lawyer to guide or protect him, is surely sub judice (under judgment) and prejudicial to the trial. Apart from the impact it could have on public opinion, it could very well pose a grave threat to his safety.
Describing Mumbai’s response in the weeks after the terrorist strike, filmmaker Anand Patwardhan writes, “Terror is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It thrives on reaction, polarization, militarization and thirst for revenge.”
The first victims of this ever-hardening stance are our own neglected and marginalized minorities in rural, tribal and peripheral India. Denied access to justice and blotted out by the media, these alienated sections have turned to violence when they had no other recourse. Without any attempt to listen to their grievances or respect their right to have a dissenting viewpoint and initiate dialogue – an approach that would have won hearts and minds - India has sought to equate them with anti-nationals and terrorists.
Like Kashmir on the western flank, the north-east border states have been engulfed in insurgency and a fratricidal guerilla war since India’s independence. Many of these conflicts are the freedom struggles of small nationalities who believe they have a historical right to determine their own destiny and who have bravely held on to their convictions despite being stamped upon by the might of India. Others have erupted in turmoil and violence because of their neglect by New Delhi, by the loss of their economic, political and cultural identity.
Ordinary people and civil society groups in the north-east, particularly in Nagaland, have often spoken of the need to go beyond New Delhi and reach out to ordinary people in the rest of India. They believe that when there is widespread pressure created by a sensitized Indian public opinion, only then can political solutions begin to emerge. According to my friends who have worked in the region, this plea also comes from the people of Kashmir.
A network of women journalists and writers across India has already mobilized in response to the initiative of young Manipuri women journalists. Early next year, they will attend a meeting in Imphal, Manipur, a state adjoining Burma, where the writ of India simply holds no sway. Its people have lived with urban guerilla warfare for more than a decade and insecurity, extortion, kidnapping and violent death is a daily part of their lives. For most of the visiting journalists, it will be their first visit to this sensitive border area long ignored by mainstream Indian media. It will be an expensive journey and most will spend money from their own pockets because of their deep sense of conviction and desire to learn from the local people.
I hope it will be the first of many such efforts, where we systematically endeavor to include these sections of society, knowing that they in turn have much to teach us about what is important in life. Irrespective of what political solutions evolve for the north-east or Kashmir, we will always remain neighbors and that is a good enough starting point for dialogue. It is through such initiatives that we come back to Gandhi’s dream of an India whose strength lies in its service to its weaker and marginalized populations.
In the present cacophony emanating from Mumbai, thankfully there are some quiet and thoughtful voices calling for ordinary Indians to consider our own minority and marginalized communities. Can we, the privileged Indians - who have skills, education, and a voice - play some role in creating the platforms for dialogue to address common concerns? India is a house divided by caste, class, race, religion and politics, which has made us all vulnerable to attack. Can we create social support systems to deal with their genuine and long suppressed grievances? Will we help our youth find an alternative to violence?
Photograph by flickr user zedvox used under Creative Commons licenses.
About the Author
Rupa Chinai is an independent journalist based in Mumbai, India. She has been writing on health and development issues for the past 25 years and her work has appeared in some of India's leading English language daily newspapers and websites as well as foreign publications. Her basic education was obtained in Mumbai and opportunities for further studies and exposure came through prestigious awards such as a journalism fellowship from the Harvard School of Public Health in the US, amongst others. She is co-author of a book on rural women's health issues and is currently engaged in writing a book on northeast India, based on 20 years of travel and work in that region.
A look back at the Mumbai attacks
Labels:
attack,
India,
mumbai,
photographers,
reuters,
taj mahal,
terror
0
comments
By Desmond Boylan
Four Reuters photographers covered the recent attacks in India. Here Arko Datta, Jayanta Shaw and Desmond Boylan (Chief Photographer, India) recall events.
Jayanta Shaw
My first experience of the Taj Mahal Hotel had been as a teenager on holiday with my parents in Mumbai. Those were fond memories. I would never have thought my second encounter with the Mumbai landmark would be so dramatic, tragic and scary.
Arko Datta
Just the previous night, I was at the Trident-Oberoi hotel, shooting pictures at the Gucci shop on the ground floor, next to the main entrance of this five-star hotel.
But since there had been no warning of an impending threat, the city continued to go about its daily chores.
Wednesday was a long day at office, and just as I got home and settled down, the first call came in, of a firing at Leopold café. Mumbai is no stranger to trouble or gang-wars and that’s what most of us in the media thought this was, especially as the area where Leopold café stands is known to witness shadowy activity as the night wears on.
But in an instant came the news of another shoot-out at Chhattrapati Shivaji railway station that most of us refer to as Victoria Terminus or just VT.
I sensed there was more to these shoot-outs and I needed to move, and try to get more information on the way. I told my colleague Punit Paranjpe to go on to VT while I headed for Leopold.
On the way I was getting a flurry of calls - with the stories only getting more bizarre - firing and blasts were being reported out of the Taj Mahal and Trident-Oberoi hotels as well.
Slowly it became clear Mumbai was seeing attacks and sieges at different locations. I decided to head for the Taj Mahal hotel first, with reports of gun shots and blasts still being heard from there.
Even as I took cover near the hotel, came further information of a blast near Nariman House and another as far as Vile Parle, close to the domestic airport.
I called Punit and told him to file his first pictures ASAP, and I decided to move. As I walked towards Leopold, I heard a blast behind me near the Taj Hotel. I ran back, only to dive for cover as there were more blasts which turned out to be grenade explosions. People were running in panic, and the darkness added more to the chaos.
There was occasional gun fire from inside the hotel building, but there was very little to photograph. This is when I heard of a fire raging at the Oberoi-Trident. I rushed there, only to be kept at a safe distance by the cops, like the rest of the media. Just then, we got more news of an explosion near a petrol station! A few of us photographers sped off on bikes, getting images of the post-blast debris - a mangled car and two-wheelers and cops on guard at the site.
After criss-crossing the streets of South Mumbai, chasing every bit of news that was coming my way, I was back outside the Taj Mahal hotel.
As I shot pictures of the hotel on fire, my thoughts were to get these to clients as soon as possible, while ensuring I stayed out of the line of fire.
I prepared for a long vigil outside the Taj. The first pictures of the fire had gone and I was trying to digest the reality unfolding before my eyes. The dramatic events would last another forty-one hours, testing our endurance.
JS:
Earlier on the Wednesday, I was Guwahati, in the Indian north-east state of Assam, preparing to cover the India vs England cricket match . By 10pm that evening I was outside the Taj Mahal hotel smelling gunpowder in the air, with gunfire all around. I was thrilled for a while. I positioned myself behind a police van watching the hotel in flames before my eyes. I started shooting with my 80-200mm lens and Canon camera. Taking 15-20 frames I stopped at around 11pm to file my first pictures to our pictures desk.
DB:
Flying from New Delhi, I landed at Mumbai’s international airport on Thursday morning to reinforce our coverage - 11 hours had passed since the first shots were fired. The normally bustling terminal was deserted, giving me a strange feeling that something was very wrong,
I persuaded a reluctant cab driver to take me to the scene. Normally a 2-hour journey, it took 40 minutes through the deserted streets. Throughout he drive we listened to the radio. There were three confirmed locations under siege - Nariman House, The Taj Mahal and Trident Oberoi hotels .
Arko and Punit were already on the ground, busy trying to cover all angles of the ongoing story while chasing stringers for additional images.
JS:
Friday morning Arko called and directed me to Nariman House, the Jewish centre in Mumbai. I arrived at the police barricade after a 2 km walk and found panic-stricken locals watching from the rooftops. It was like a war scene. The sounds of a helicopter startled me.
Commandos were firing at Nariman House from the helicopter. I moved to a rooftop to get a better shooting angle.
The roar of helicopters and exchange of gunfire made a scene reminiscent of a Hollywood blockbuster. Arko informed me rescued people were coming out of the Oberoi Trident hotel, so I ran there.
DB:
For the next few hours I walked around. I heard sporadic AK47 gunfire, and I could hear explosions coming from inside the Trident Oberoi, where hundreds of silent onlookers were gathered.
Hours later, I was still dragging my luggage through the streets and several people approached me asking if I was an escaped hotel hostage. Eventually, I managed to check in to my hotel on the Marine drive.
We established the hotel as a pictures-editing centre. Using its wireless network, we could operate several laptops simultaneously. We used it as a charging point for phones, laptops and camera batteries. It was adrenalin that kept us going.
At the Taj, where the rampage ended, the media behaved like the pigeons and seagulls that perched on the building itself, scattering after each volley of gunfire or explosion, only to return to their initial positions.
AD:
During the city siege, Mumbai was panic-stricken, with only a whiff of rumour enough to send people rushing for cover and closing their shutters.
The city’s famed spirit had worn thin, people were shaken. They were feeling vulnerable and exposed by the lack of security. Theaters and other haunts were quiet as residents digested the uncomfortable reality that terror had struck at the heart of the country’s financial capital.
DB:
We relied on our instincts backed up by solid information on the ground, knowing from the beginning it was impossible for the four of us to staff each siege location round the clock – each one had over five positions to be manned, some of them dangerous and where you could be stuck for hours, others quickly changing as security forces would push us back. Uncertainty and worries of how long the rampage was going to last went through our minds.
We made sure our first priority was safety, we worked sometimes together at the same location, covering each other. Arko and Punit, our photographers in Mumbai, had done their homework — this was the key to our success, managing a solid local network of contacts in a moment of crisis. From the start, we had all angles covered, we had planned for such a situation.
It was just a matter of putting it all into place and remaining calm.
Four Reuters photographers covered the recent attacks in India. Here Arko Datta, Jayanta Shaw and Desmond Boylan (Chief Photographer, India) recall events.
Jayanta Shaw
My first experience of the Taj Mahal Hotel had been as a teenager on holiday with my parents in Mumbai. Those were fond memories. I would never have thought my second encounter with the Mumbai landmark would be so dramatic, tragic and scary.
Arko Datta
Just the previous night, I was at the Trident-Oberoi hotel, shooting pictures at the Gucci shop on the ground floor, next to the main entrance of this five-star hotel.
But since there had been no warning of an impending threat, the city continued to go about its daily chores.
Wednesday was a long day at office, and just as I got home and settled down, the first call came in, of a firing at Leopold café. Mumbai is no stranger to trouble or gang-wars and that’s what most of us in the media thought this was, especially as the area where Leopold café stands is known to witness shadowy activity as the night wears on.
But in an instant came the news of another shoot-out at Chhattrapati Shivaji railway station that most of us refer to as Victoria Terminus or just VT.
I sensed there was more to these shoot-outs and I needed to move, and try to get more information on the way. I told my colleague Punit Paranjpe to go on to VT while I headed for Leopold.
On the way I was getting a flurry of calls - with the stories only getting more bizarre - firing and blasts were being reported out of the Taj Mahal and Trident-Oberoi hotels as well.
Slowly it became clear Mumbai was seeing attacks and sieges at different locations. I decided to head for the Taj Mahal hotel first, with reports of gun shots and blasts still being heard from there.
Even as I took cover near the hotel, came further information of a blast near Nariman House and another as far as Vile Parle, close to the domestic airport.
I called Punit and told him to file his first pictures ASAP, and I decided to move. As I walked towards Leopold, I heard a blast behind me near the Taj Hotel. I ran back, only to dive for cover as there were more blasts which turned out to be grenade explosions. People were running in panic, and the darkness added more to the chaos.
There was occasional gun fire from inside the hotel building, but there was very little to photograph. This is when I heard of a fire raging at the Oberoi-Trident. I rushed there, only to be kept at a safe distance by the cops, like the rest of the media. Just then, we got more news of an explosion near a petrol station! A few of us photographers sped off on bikes, getting images of the post-blast debris - a mangled car and two-wheelers and cops on guard at the site.
After criss-crossing the streets of South Mumbai, chasing every bit of news that was coming my way, I was back outside the Taj Mahal hotel.
As I shot pictures of the hotel on fire, my thoughts were to get these to clients as soon as possible, while ensuring I stayed out of the line of fire.
I prepared for a long vigil outside the Taj. The first pictures of the fire had gone and I was trying to digest the reality unfolding before my eyes. The dramatic events would last another forty-one hours, testing our endurance.
JS:
Earlier on the Wednesday, I was Guwahati, in the Indian north-east state of Assam, preparing to cover the India vs England cricket match . By 10pm that evening I was outside the Taj Mahal hotel smelling gunpowder in the air, with gunfire all around. I was thrilled for a while. I positioned myself behind a police van watching the hotel in flames before my eyes. I started shooting with my 80-200mm lens and Canon camera. Taking 15-20 frames I stopped at around 11pm to file my first pictures to our pictures desk.
DB:
Flying from New Delhi, I landed at Mumbai’s international airport on Thursday morning to reinforce our coverage - 11 hours had passed since the first shots were fired. The normally bustling terminal was deserted, giving me a strange feeling that something was very wrong,
I persuaded a reluctant cab driver to take me to the scene. Normally a 2-hour journey, it took 40 minutes through the deserted streets. Throughout he drive we listened to the radio. There were three confirmed locations under siege - Nariman House, The Taj Mahal and Trident Oberoi hotels .
Arko and Punit were already on the ground, busy trying to cover all angles of the ongoing story while chasing stringers for additional images.
JS:
Friday morning Arko called and directed me to Nariman House, the Jewish centre in Mumbai. I arrived at the police barricade after a 2 km walk and found panic-stricken locals watching from the rooftops. It was like a war scene. The sounds of a helicopter startled me.
Commandos were firing at Nariman House from the helicopter. I moved to a rooftop to get a better shooting angle.
The roar of helicopters and exchange of gunfire made a scene reminiscent of a Hollywood blockbuster. Arko informed me rescued people were coming out of the Oberoi Trident hotel, so I ran there.
DB:
For the next few hours I walked around. I heard sporadic AK47 gunfire, and I could hear explosions coming from inside the Trident Oberoi, where hundreds of silent onlookers were gathered.
Hours later, I was still dragging my luggage through the streets and several people approached me asking if I was an escaped hotel hostage. Eventually, I managed to check in to my hotel on the Marine drive.
We established the hotel as a pictures-editing centre. Using its wireless network, we could operate several laptops simultaneously. We used it as a charging point for phones, laptops and camera batteries. It was adrenalin that kept us going.
At the Taj, where the rampage ended, the media behaved like the pigeons and seagulls that perched on the building itself, scattering after each volley of gunfire or explosion, only to return to their initial positions.
AD:
During the city siege, Mumbai was panic-stricken, with only a whiff of rumour enough to send people rushing for cover and closing their shutters.
The city’s famed spirit had worn thin, people were shaken. They were feeling vulnerable and exposed by the lack of security. Theaters and other haunts were quiet as residents digested the uncomfortable reality that terror had struck at the heart of the country’s financial capital.
DB:
We relied on our instincts backed up by solid information on the ground, knowing from the beginning it was impossible for the four of us to staff each siege location round the clock – each one had over five positions to be manned, some of them dangerous and where you could be stuck for hours, others quickly changing as security forces would push us back. Uncertainty and worries of how long the rampage was going to last went through our minds.
We made sure our first priority was safety, we worked sometimes together at the same location, covering each other. Arko and Punit, our photographers in Mumbai, had done their homework — this was the key to our success, managing a solid local network of contacts in a moment of crisis. From the start, we had all angles covered, we had planned for such a situation.
It was just a matter of putting it all into place and remaining calm.
India Should Not Repeat American Mistakes
By Joseph D’Souza
Hyderabad, Dec 20 : After the Mumbai terrorist attacks, India must not commit the same mistakes as the United States in its war on terror. A pursuit of justice must treat people of all faiths with respect and, at the end of the day, encourage diversity.
India’s response to the brazen attacks on Mumbai which began on November 26, 2008, provides a great opportunity for addressing all forms of terrorism the country has experienced in the last few decades.
In the last year alone, bomb blasts were carried out by extremist Islamists, fundamentalist Hindus, and Maoist groups against the general population. In fact, over the last few years India is only second to Iraq in the death toll due to terrorist attacks as recorded by the National Counterterrorism Center in Washington, D.C. This doesn’t account for premeditated mob violence which has increasingly targeted minorities as seen in the ethnic cleansing of Dalit and Tribal Christians in the Orissa state in December 2007 and August 2008.
All these extremist groups threaten what is called “the idea of India,” which refers to a united nation made up of diverse religious and ethnic groups.
Simply put, we cannot afford to let any form of terrorism go unpunished. India cannot let the extremist Hindu groups who have displaced tens of thousands of Dalit Christians in Orissa escape justice.
The public anger after the Mumbai attacks is largely against those who have not governed India well in addition to the terrorists. India clearly needs to revamp its internal security structures. Indian politicians and the Indian government are searching for appropriate ways to respond to terrorists beyond India’s borders. And India is well within its rights to go after the non-state players who carried out the Mumbai attacks. India can hope for a united response with the U.S., Britain, Israel, and others whose citizens were killed in the attacks.
But India needs to work hard to undo the marginalization of Muslims in recent years by political parties who subscribe to fundamentalist Hindu ideology. India must firmly deal with ‘Hindutva’ terrorism (see recent articles in India Today and Tehelka magazine). India must build goodwill with the 150 million strong Muslim population whose leaders have condemned the Mumbai attacks. India must not target innocent Muslims inside or outside its borders for ill-devised political ends.
America’s mistake was to launch an indiscriminate war against Muslims who were not connected to 9/11. America’s decision makers didn’t take enough time to look at the contexts in which vulnerable Muslims are recruited to become terrorists. The American war on terror resulted in human rights abuses. It became associated with racial profiling. And thus, a just cause lost the goodwill of the world given in the aftermath of 9/11.
If the Indian government and political rulers repeat American mistakes, we will end up furthering more terrorism of every kind given the great religious and ethnic diversity of India. This is the time — when Indians feel as one and are united against terrorism — for the Indian government to act fairly and not take foolish actions. We hope citizens passionate about true justice from around the globe will encourage our leaders toward these goals in the days ahead.
* Joseph D’souza is the international president of the Dalit Freedom Network. He lives in Hyderabad, India and works out of Hyderabad, London, and Denver.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
