Terrorism in India and its implications

Jo Johnson reports for the Financial Times about terrorism in India. Both his article and its title suggest that there might be more to terrorism that "the terrorists hate us for our freedom": Roots of terror lie in greed and grievance 11/27/08.

But Johnson reports that there is a danger that India will simply blame the horrible attacks this week in Mumbai on Pakistan, whether are not there is evidence of such involvement:

Manmohan Singh, who as prime minister since May 2004 has presided over a spectacular transformation of India’s global standing, was quick to blame the country’s neighbours for the terrorist attacks in Mumbai.

Whenever terror strikes, the Indian elite instinctively looks for scapegoats beyond its borders, almost always blaming the Pakistan-based militant groups that are opposed to the peace process between the two nuclear-armed rivals. They point out that big terrorist attacks often coincide with periods of rapprochement.

"Unless the national security adviser had told the prime minister – a circumspect man not given to rash statements – that there was evidence of foreign involvement, he wouldn’t have gone on television and said this, especially when he’s trying to work with [Pakistan president] Asif Ali Zardari," says Sumit Ganguly, professor of political science at Indiana University. "The Pakistani president has made a series of extraordinary gestures that the Indian prime minister is extremely keen on reciprocating."

But the rapidity with which India blames Pakistan or groups operating under the direct or indirect control of Islamabad’s main intelligence agency worries those who believe that terrorism on Indian soil also has indigenous roots. [my emphasis]

For news on the terror attacks, see Memeorandum.

Conservatives are fond of arguing that because many active terrorists and their leaders are not from poor backgrounds, that the effects of poverty and desperate conditions among particular populations must have nothing to do with the causes of terrorism. It's a little like arguing that because most US soldiers aren't owners of oil wells that it would be impossible for oil to be a factor in any US war.

Johnson writes:

Despite four years of turbo-charged growth, there are still hundreds of millions living in abject poverty. Of all the groups yet to benefit from spectacular growth, none, apart from so-called dalits (once known as “untouchables”) and tribals, have fared as poorly as Muslims.

Some, inevitably, succumb to the blandishments of recruiters from the country’s myriad insurgencies and extremist movements. Unless these underlying causes of India’s susceptibility to terrorism are addressed, it is possible that India’s path to superpowerdom will be bumpier than most predict.

Johnson doesn't mention it in the article. But the status of the disputed majority-Muslim Kashmir province is also a big issue for Muslims in the world, especially in South Asia. Even though most South Asians don't live in Kashmir.

Tags: india, kashmir, terrorism