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

A Rabbi Against the State: When Faith Refuses Power

In a world where identity is weaponized and religion is drafted into political armies, the sight of an ultra-Orthodox rabbi standing beside Palestinian flags unsettles nearly everyone. Yet there stands — black coat, beard, sidelocks — calmly declaring something that scrambles modern assumptions: “ Judaism is not Zionism.” For him, this is not rebellion . It is obedience . Affiliated with , a small and highly controversial Haredi sect, Rabbi Beck represents a theological current that predates modern nationalism. His argument is not secular. It is not progressive. It is not post-modern. It is ancient . And that is precisely the point. The Interview That Disturbs Categories In one widely circulated long-form interview, the exchange unfolds with almost disarming simplicity. Interviewer: Rabbi Beck, how can you oppose Israel as a Jewish rabbi? Rabbi Beck: Judaism and Zionism are two completely different things. Judaism is a religion. Zionism is a political movement founded little more ...

When the Warning Comes from the General Moshe Ya’alon, Jewish Supremacy, and the Echo Nobody Wanted to Hear

History has a cruel sense of irony. Sometimes the most devastating indictments do not come from the oppressed, the bombed, the buried, or the silenced—but from the very architects of power who once swore they were different. This week, that indictment came from Moshe Ya’alon : former Israeli Defense Minister, former IDF Chief of Staff, lifelong pillar of Israel’s security establishment. Not a dissident poet. Not a radical academic. Not a Palestinian survivor. A general. And what he said shattered the last polite illusion. “ The ideology of Jewish supremacy that has become dominant in the Israeli government is reminiscent of Nazi race theory.” Pause there. Sit with it. This was not shouted at a protest . It was not scribbled on a placard. It was written calmly, deliberately, after attending a Holocaust Remembrance ceremony —then reading reports of Jewish settlers attacking Palestinians , blocking ambulances , fracturing skulls , burning homes. Never Again, apparently, now ...

The High Priest of “Serious” Wars Discovers Bibi

  There was a time when rode into every Middle Eastern catastrophe like a TED Talk with a press pass. If there was a war to explain, a regime to modernize, or a “vital message” to send with cruise missiles, Tom was there — sleeves rolled up, metaphors polished. Back when the invasion of was sold as a democratic software update, Friedman wasn’t exactly storming the barricades. He was midwifing “creative destruction.” The region would be shocked into sanity. History would bend toward market reform. Fast forward. Now he’s discovered that might be bending something else entirely. When an Ex–Prime Minister Uses the Words “Ethnic Cleansing” What jolts Friedman’s latest column is not campus rhetoric. Not activist slogans. Not fringe NGOs. It’s — a former Israeli prime minister — using language that once would have detonated diplomatic careers. Olmert wrote in Haaretz that: “A violent and criminal effort is underway to ethnically cleanse territories in the West Bank.” Let...

“Not Auschwitz — Yet Still Genocide”: When Israeli Holocaust Historians Break the Silence on Gaza

  There are moments in history when the most unsettling truths do not come from one’s enemies, but from within. From those who know the past most intimately. From those whose moral authority is built not on ideology, but on memory. In December 2025, two of Israel’s most respected Holocaust and genocide scholars— Prof. Daniel Blatman and Prof. Amos Goldberg of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem—published a deeply unsettling opinion article in Haaretz . What they argued was not casual, rhetorical, or activist hyperbole. It was a grave historical judgment. Their conclusion was stark: What is happening in Gaza is not Auschwitz. But it belongs to the same family of crimes: genocide. Why This Voice Matters Blatman and Goldberg are not marginal figures. They are historians whose professional lives have been devoted to studying Nazi crimes, genocide mechanisms, memory, and moral responsibility . Their scholarship is rooted in the very catastrophe that shaped modern Jewish iden...

Even the Dead Are Not Safe: How Power Desecrates Graves and Calls It Security

  There is a final dignity that every civilization, every faith, every moral tradition claims to respect: the dignity of the dead. In Gaza and the West Bank, even that has been revoked. Homes can be flattened. Children can be starved. Hospitals can be reduced to ash. These crimes, we are told, are “tragic necessities.” But graves ? What threat does a corpse pose to a modern army armed with drones , tanks , and nuclear ambiguity ? Apparently, enough to be bulldozed. Graves as Enemy Infrastructure According to detailed reporting by Al Jazeera , Israeli forces in Gaza did not merely fight the living — they waged war on cemeteries . Tombstones were crushed. Graves were excavated . Human remains were scattered, mixed, lost . Families returned not to mourning, but to forensic horror: bones without names, names without bodies. This was not collateral damage . This was not crossfire. This was methodical excavation . Heavy machinery was deployed to retrieve the body of one ...