Memories of Mumbai’s attack will mark the upcoming legislative ballot.
Gabriela Perdomo – When Indians go to the polls in May 2009, memories of the carnage lived in Mumbai on Nov. 26, 27 and 28 will guide the hands of many. Even as social unrest will likely be less prevalent than it is today—provided there is no new terrorist attack before the election—national security will play a key role in determining who gets voted into office.
Gabriela Perdomo – When Indians go to the polls in May 2009, memories of the carnage lived in Mumbai on Nov. 26, 27 and 28 will guide the hands of many. Even as social unrest will likely be less prevalent than it is today—provided there is no new terrorist attack before the election—national security will play a key role in determining who gets voted into office.
The most recent terrorist attack against the financial heart of India left almost 200 people dead and over 300 wounded. It was a spectacular assault at separate locations, usually crowded with tourists, with armed rifles and incendiary bombs. Although not unfamiliar with terrorism, India’s population reacted with particular anger to their beloved city’s siege this time. Fuelled by government allegations that the attacks were carried by "foreign elements"—meaning Pakistani nationals—hundreds of people took to the streets calling for swift action against their neighbouring nation. Many of them continue to call for an all out war.
Less than six months before the next national ballot is due, there is no doubt security will be at the centre of the campaign. The opposition National Democratic Alliance (NDA) has based most if its criticism of the current government on the allegation that it is too soft on terror. India has been the target of over a dozen terrorist attacks, including another one in Mumbai that killed 209 people in 2006, under the administration of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA).
The UPA, a coalition of parties led by the Indian National Congress (INC), was formed following the 2004 legislative election and has been in power since. The INC’s president, Italian-born Sonia Ghandi, declined to assume the post of prime minister due to her foreign birth, and former finance minister Manmohan Singh was sworn in. Singh is the first Sikh to become head of government in India.
Singh’s major strengths have been to maintain solid economic growth—close to seven per cent on average each year—and having a "soft", commercial-based approach to foreign affairs. India today holds good relations with virtually every important player in the international scene, from the United States to Russia to Brazil. But, as a bystander told a reporter in Mumbai in the aftermath of the latest attack: "They say we are amongst the brightest people in the world. But developing software doesn’t make us smart. We must find a smart way to deal with terrorism."
Singh’s advances in fighting terrorism in India—which pre-dates the term "war on terrorism" by decades—is not outstanding. India lacks an effective anti-terror agency that can work in coordination with both national and international intelligence services in order to identify and neutralize threats. The National Security Guard—which Singh vowed to reform and expand after the Mumbai assaults—is the only existing antiterrorist unit. It works as an elite response group, not as a comprehensive agency capable of handling terror threats.
The UPA government claims that it has reduced terrorism in Kashmir, the disputed territory with Pakistan, during its tenure. It also prides itself in having improved relations with its neighbouring nuclear nation over the past few years, and of maintaining alive a peace negotiation with Pakistan that was started during the previous administration when the NDA’s Atal Bihari Vajpayee served as head of government.
But its anti-terrorism credentials stop there. Meanwhile, opposition parties and an angry population feeling impotent before the recurrent slap of terror have already begun to mount pressure on the INC and its allies to take this threat seriously. As the siege of a five-star hotel continued in Mumbai on Nov. 28, the NDA’s leading member—the Indian People’s Party (BJP)—was already blaming Singh’s government for being "unwilling or unable" to tackle terrorism. Protesters in Mumbai have taken to the streets not only to condemn the attackers, but also to decry the government’s incompetence to stop them.
The UPA, and particularly the INC, will go to the polls next year hurt by this month’s terrorist blow. Singh’s actions and words so far suggest that his administration is not keen on restarting a war with Pakistan, and will focus instead on revamping the country’s intelligence system and response units. The multiple parties adhered to the NDA, most certainly the BJP, will clearly appeal to grieving Indians to support their nationalist agenda and will call for more drastic action against Pakistan.
India should brace for six intense months. The upcoming election will provide a dangerous platform for all parties to make their bids on how to deal with the clear threat posed by terrorist tactics. Pakistan will remain the major target of political salvos. On the other hand, as calm slowly returns to the financial heart of India, the big black tail of the current global economic slowdown will bring yet another concern to the table. It will be an important election, and voters must remain aware that their ballot lies at the centre of domestic turmoil as much as it lies at the core of one of the most important questions the international community must ask itself in 2009: How best to deal with Pakistan?
