In the world of cyberspace and SMS, 26/11 is being widely compared to 9/11. Differences in US and Indian dating conventions apart, how valid are those comparisons? If indeed, they have validity, what lessons can be drawn from 9/11 and the subsequent actions of the US government?
Both attacks were brilliantly planned and executed with security gaps being exploited by teams that covered all angles and contingencies. The initial response of the state to both attacks was bewilderment. Both attacks triggered an instant sea-change in mainstream attitudes in both countries and indeed, the world.
There are other similarities. The WTC was hit when the US was in a recession after the dotcom bust. The Mumbai attacks come in the midst of a global recession. Also, 26/11 will lead to changes in foreign policy orientation as 9/11 did.
In economic terms, 9/11 may have been a positive factor for the US economy. It sparked massive security-related spending. That spending led to a boom across the US military-industrial complex and also to job creation. It compensated for lost tourism revenues as America tightened controls.
The US attacks also attracted global sympathy, which made it possible for America to lead an alliance in the invasion of Afghanistan. It is a different matter that the US massively miscalculated its senseless Iraq adventure. Also, the US created a security establishment that sanctioned massive, institutionalised human rights abuse.
More From This Section
This is where analogies break down. India doesn’t have a military-industrial complex that can meaningfully generate jobs and growth. So the Mumbai attacks will not help speed up economic recovery here while tourism revenues will surely be lost.
Nor does India have the power to wipe out terrorist bases in Pakistan. Not even the US possesses that power. Otherwise it would have already gone wholesale after bases in Pakistan instead of making the odd piecemeal attack across the Afghan border.
India already has a security regime that is routinely abusive. Everybody from citizens suspected of “normal crimes” to suspected terrorists can expect to be subjected to torture. Sadly, it is also a very ineffective security regime.
This is because it lacks resources and coordination. The NSG are well-trained but they didn’t have a plane to take them to Mumbai tout suite. The Maharashtra police didn’t have local SWAT teams with automatic weapons to handle the situation. The coastguard and navy cannot detect sea-borne attacks of this nature. There were no plans of the buildings available. Nobody knew how to jam satphone signals. Etc. Etc.
The level of public anger with the political establishment and governance systems is healthy. It’s led to the sacking of several politicians and it should eventually lead to the creation of a more effective security mechanism. Perhaps, even a political class more sensitive to voter needs. A look at the slogans on view at the Gateway Rally shows where the anger lies and it could be a pointer to what politicians need to do.
The knee-jerk reaction will be to try and create more repressive systems. Indian laws already allow suspected terrorists to be held for 90 days (and tortured) without production in court. Extending that to 900 days will not make security more effective.
There’s a spate of elections due over the next few months. The results will reflect some of the changes in public attitude caused by 26/11. The BJP will try to project itself as tough on terrorism, glossing over IC-814. The Congress can point to its de facto “no negotiation” policy in hostage situations. As the ruling coalition, the UPA has a little, very little, time to come up with concrete responses to 26/11. If only it can do so.