Skip to main content

Lack of Preparedness Comes Brutally to Light

MUMBAI, India — In the wake of last week’s devastating terrorist attacks here, one thing has become clear: India’s security forces are so spectacularly unprepared, its intelligence agencies so riven by conflict and miscommunication, that it lacks the ability to respond adequately to such attacks, much less prevent them.
India’s government is being called poorly prepared for last week’s terrorist attacks. The gunmen seemed better armed than most police officers, who often carry only the wooden or Lucite pole known as a lathi, above.
This nation of 1.2 billion has only a few hundred counterterrorism officials in its intelligence bureau. Its tiny, ill-paid police force has little training, few weapons and even less ammunition. The coast guard has fewer than 100 working boats for a shoreline nearly 5,000 miles long.
In the latest revelation of India’s lack of preparedness, on Wednesday, a full week after the attacks, sniffer dogs discovered a bag with a 17-pound bomb that was left by the terrorists in the city’s central train station and that was later deposited in a pile of lost bags, police officials said. The police defused the bomb on the spot and never bothered to clear the station, Victoria Terminus. It is also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus and is Mumbai’s busiest train station.
Long before last week’s attacks on Mumbai, which stunned the world and left 173 people dead, Indian intelligence officials and their Western counterparts had passed on various tips about the possibility of such assaults. But the Indians utterly lacked the ability to assess the significance of those tips or respond to them.
As a result, a group of just 10 attackers, according to the police, took the city by surprise on Nov. 26. They easily killed the police officers who opposed them and seized control of some of the city’s best-known landmarks, as all of India watched in horror on television.
“The scale of the task before us is colossal,” said Ajai Sahni, a former Indian intelligence official and the executive director of the Institute for Conflict Management in Delhi. “We are looking at a system which does not have the capacity to either generate adequate intelligence, or to respond to it.”
Although India’s prime minister, Manmohan Singh, has promised far-reaching reforms, earlier efforts to improve police training and effectiveness have gone nowhere. In any case, such efforts are unlikely to occur quickly in India’s vast, corruption-riddled bureaucracy.
That could leave India, a key American ally and one of the engines of global economic growth in the past decade, dangerously vulnerable to more terrorist strikes.
The Mumbai attacks have pushed tensions between India and Pakistan, where the gunmen are said to have been trained, to their highest level in years. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice flew to New Delhi on Wednesday and to Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital, on Thursday in an effort to calm the situation.
The violence has also fed an unprecedented and broad-based rage at the Indian government for not having done more to protect its people. On Wednesday evening, tens of thousands in Mumbai marched near the attacked sites, chanting slogans that made their anger clear. Similar rallies were held in New Delhi and in the southern technology hubs of Bangalore and Hyderabad.
Many Indians were stunned to discover how easily, and thoroughly, the group of militants initially overpowered the police who tried to stop them (all but one of the militants were eventually shot dead). The attackers all had AK-47 rifles and pistols, and plenty of ammunition — far more firepower than any of the officers who confronted them. None of the police officers who initially encountered the terrorists had bulletproof vests, allowing the attackers to kill a number of them quickly, despite some heroic efforts at resistance.
Scenes from closed-circuit cameras, played endlessly on TV in the days after the attacks, showed police officers running from the gunmen alongside terrified civilians. In all, 20 police officers and commandos were killed.
After the assault began on the night of Nov. 26, it took hours for the Indian commando squad to arrive in Mumbai because it is based near Delhi, hundreds of miles away, and does not have its own aircraft. Even after the commandos, who are better armed and trained than police officers are, began fighting the terrorists holed up in the Taj Mahal Palace & Tower hotel, they lacked a floor plan, whereas the militants seemed to know the hotel’s layout well.
In a sense, none of this was a surprise. India’s National Security Guards force has only about 7,400 commandos, and it has often taken hours to respond to crises in the past, Mr. Sahni said. As for the city and state police forces, their equipment and training are far more meager, and they are lightly scattered across a vast population. India has 125 police officers for every 100,000 residents, one of the world’s lowest ratios.
Intelligence failures also played a role in India’s inability to deal properly with the Mumbai attacks. The United States warned Indian officials in mid-October of possible terrorist attacks on “touristy areas frequented by Westerners” in Mumbai, echoing other general alerts by Indian intelligence. In the past week, reports of other, far more detailed warnings have been rife in the Indian news media, though government officials have disputed them.
But the debate masks a broader problem, Mr. Sahni said: Neither the intelligence agencies nor the government has the ability to prioritize or assess those threats, or to act on them. The various wings of India’s intelligence apparatus, like their American counterparts before the Sept. 11 attacks, are famous for failing to communicate and share intelligence.
In the wake of the attacks, some police officials have become remarkably outspoken and even angry about their inability to defend the citizenry or even themselves.
“You see this old musket? It is useless,” said Ankush Hotkar, a police officer, as he stood Wednesday in the cavernous hall of the main train station. He was pointing to a battered old hunting rifle in the hands of one of his fellow officers. Mr. Hotkar himself, despite his 26 years in the Mumbai police force, carried only a lathi, the wooden or Lucite pole that most police officers here carry as their only weapon.
“The weapons they give us are no good, so policemen died,” he said, his voice thick with anger.
The Mumbai police are given scarcely any training and no opportunities to fire their weapons, Mr. Hotkar said. Starting salaries are 3,050 rupees a month, just over $60 — not enough to live on, he added.
“Maximum corruption is going on,” Mr. Hotkar said wearily.
Mumbai’s beat officers are not even issued individual radios to communicate with one another. Instead, they must find a nearby “beat marshal,” an officer on motorcycle who is equipped with a radio to report incidents, said Police Inspector Maniksingh P. Patil, an officer at a station house near the hotels that were attacked.
The police officers who are assigned to guard political figures are generally much better trained and equipped, a point that has been the focus of outraged commentary in local newspapers here in the past week.
On Wednesday evening, a throng of angry people gathered near the Taj Mahal hotel, one of the buildings seized by the terrorists. As the demonstrators marched through the streets, many held up banners with slogans like “No Protection, No Security” and “No Protection, No Vote.” There were chants of “Enough is enough!” and promises that they would demand real change.
But as night fell, the rally dissolved, with many of the marchers straying away. One observer, Dezadd Dotiwalla, 24, seemed dismayed and said she saw the protest’s disintegration as a symbol of the very complacency that the marchers were promising to overcome.
“I sometimes wonder whether we deserve any better,” he said.
Somini Sengupta and Jeremy Kahn contributed reporting.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Politicization of Antisemitism: Randy Fine, AIPAC, and the Fight Over Anti-Israel Speech

  Randy Fine.  Brief introduction of Randy Fine.  Randy Fine is a U.S. Representative-Elect for Florida's 6th Congressional District and a former Florida State Senator . Born on April 20, 1974, in Tucson , Arizona , Fine holds degrees from Harvard College and Harvard Business School . He began his political career in 2016 as a member of the Florida House of Representatives and later served in the Florida Senate. Fine is known for his strong pro-Israel stance, earning him the nickname " Hebrew Hammer, " and his socially conservative views . He has been involved in contentious legislation and has faced both support and criticism for his policies and rhetoric. Detailed overview of Randy Fine 's stance and legislative efforts related to criminalizing the distribution of anti-Israel flyers, along with broader context about his political agenda and controversies : --- 1. Randy Fine’s Legislative Efforts Against Anti-Israel Flyers - Florida’s Hate Crime Law (2023): ...

Price Tag Attackers: Extremist Settler Violence in the West Bank.

  Year-by-year breakdown of documented " Price Tag" attacks in the West Bank and Israel , based on reports from UN OCHA , B’Tselem , Yesh Din , and Israeli media (Haaretz, Times of Israel). Introduction to "Price Tag" Attackers  "Price Tag" attackers are extremist Israeli settlers , primarily affiliated with radical right-wing groups, who carry out violent acts agains Palestinians, Israeli security forces, and left-wing activists  in retaliation for perceived threats to Jewish settlements in the West Bank . The term refers to the " price " they seek to impose for actions like outpost demolitions or Palestinian attacks on Israelis.   - Vandalism, arson, or violence by extremist settlers against Palestinians, Israeli security forces, or left-wing activists.      - Often involves graffiti (e.g., "Price Tag," "Revenge," or "Arabs Out").     - Retaliation for Palestinian attacks, outpost demolitions, or Israeli gover...

CLIMATE CHANGE

FOR STARTERS: WHAT IS CLIMATE CHANGE? The issues: 1. Are humans responsible for most of the global temperature rise of the past century or so, or is the increase just a typical fluctuation in global temperature? 2.  If most of the temperature rise can be attributed to increases in anthropogenic CO 2 emissions, what are the likely consequences if no action is taken to curb these emissions? What is the evidence?  Is it compelling? § What is the scientific consensus? § Climate models and their predictions § Consequences of the predictions § Strategies for change Chemistry we need to learn § The Earth’s energy balance - the greenhouse effect § The shapes of molecules - valence shell electron pair repulsion (VSEPR) theory § Molecular vibrations – how they absorb IR radiation § Masses and moles - weighing to count molecules Earth’s atmospher     a) The Earth is about 33 O C warmer than  expected  if we consider on...

Zionism, Antisemitism — and the Grotesque Death of a Political Theology

  If you ever wanted to witness how confusion, opportunism, theology, nationalism, and bigotry collide in real time — you didn’t need a medieval church council. You only needed to tune into a meeting of the . There, amid political loyalists and pop-culture appointees, a spectacle unfolded: Zionism was denounced, antisemitic conspiracies were flirted with, and centuries-old theological errors were recycled as if they were fresh revelations. But the deeper issue is not one controversial appointee. The deeper issue is this: What precisely is Zionism? And how does it intersect — or collide — with antisemitism? Because in today’s discourse, the two are either falsely merged or lazily separated without thought. Let us disentangle them carefully. 1. What Is Zionism — Precisely? Zionism , in its original and political form, is a 19th-century nationalist movement. It emerged in Europe not from theology, but from crisis. The father of modern political Zionism, , was not respon...

The Media Sold the War. We Watched It Happen.

What Adam H. Johnson’s How to Sell a Genocide reveals—and what the question of digital witnessing forces us to confront There is a disturbing question at the heart of the Gaza catastrophe that cannot be answered simply by asking what governments did, what armies did, or even what the media reported. There is another question: What did the world do while watching? Adam H. Johnson’s How to Sell a Genocide: The Media’s Complicity in the Destruction of Gaza, published by Pluto Press, approaches Gaza through the machinery of mainstream American media. His investigation examines how some of the most influential institutions in the Western information system—including The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN and MSNBC—framed the destruction of Gaza. It is an important question because wars are not fought only with weapons. They are also fought through language. Before bombs become statistics, they become headlines. Before civilian deaths become numbers, they become narratives. Before dest...