Forensic report establishes presence of 6 terrorists during Pathankot strike

Three months after the Pathankot airbase was attacked by terrorists belonging to the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), a forensic report has established that six terrorists were present there. A forensic examination of the samples collected from the blown-up Airmen’s Billet, where the last leg of the operation was conducted, has found that the samples belonged to “two humans” but it was not possible to extract any “DNA samples” from them.

There was a debate on the number of terrorists present at the airbase, which came under attack from the alleged JeM terrorists on the intervening night of January 1 and 2. While the bodies of four terrorists killed within the first 24 hours of the operation was found at the airbase, the bodies of the other two could not be found as the Airmen’s Billet, where they were hiding, had been blown up by the National Security Guard (NSG). Two different samples were collected from the Billet and sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), Chandigarh.

“The forensic report says the samples tested positive for human remains. The remains were collected from two different rooms. The report says they belong to two different humans. The remains were so badly charred that it was not possible to extract DNA samples from them,” said a senior government official. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) had to send two reminders to CFSL before the reports were sent in.

On February 8, The Hindu, while giving out the details of the operations, had published an interview with NSG Director-General R.C. Tayal. He had said he was certain that there were six terrorists in the airbase as the ‘go-through’ sensors (a listening device) on the wall of the Airmen’s Billet had intercepted the chatter of two terrorists. When contacted on Tuesday, Mr. Tayal said: “I have not seen the forensic report but we have always said there were six terrorists at the airbase.” A spokesperson of the NIA said: “We do not want to comment on this.”

The NIA has preserved the bodies of the four terrorists and has shared the photographs with Pakistan through a letter rogatory. A Special Investigation Team from Pakistan is expected to visit India to conduct joint investigations.

Read More

ISI, not Pak. Army trains LeT, Jaish: Musharraf

Pakistan’s former military ruler Pervez Musharraf on Thursday said ISI trains LeT and Jaish militants and terror attacks in India will not stop until New Delhi addresses the “core” issue of Kashmir.

“Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) trains Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorists,” said Mr. Musharraf.

“Pakistan Army is not training civilians. Intelligence organisation on our side as well as on your side is involved,” he said in an interview to India Today TV.

When asked if he sees any progress in the India-Pakistan peace process, Mr. Musharraf said, “Everything will stop if you address the core issue. That is what you don’t want to do,” he said. “Kashmir continues to arouse sentiments in Pakistan,” said Mr. Musharraf. “Anyone who is fighting in Kashmir is a freedom fighter,” he said.

“You don’t want [to move forward on the core issue]. You want to bulldoze us, you want to bully us and you want to dominate us. You only want to talk about issues concern you like terrorism, Mumbai and Pathankot. So I don’t feel, core issues are moving forward,” he said when asked to comment on Foreign Secretary-level talks that were postponed after Pathankot attack.

Read More

Pak. to seek more proof from India on Pathankot attack

With no headway made in the probe into the Pathankot terror attack, Pakistan plans to seek more evidence from India, a media report said on Monday. This comes days after Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said the outcome of the investigation into the assault would be made public soon.

A Pakistani Government team, which is investigating the attack, will ask the Foreign Ministry to seek more evidence from India.

“The team has almost completed its investigation into five cellphone numbers [allegedly used for making calls from Pakistan to India] provided by the Indian government. No further leads were found from these numbers because they were unregistered and had fake identities,” Dawn quoted a source as saying.

“The probe is not heading further. The team needs more evidence. Therefore, it has written to the Government to speak to India and apprise it of the situation and demand more evidence to move forward in investigation here.”

Answering a question about the people, including Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) chief Maulana Masood Azhar, detained in connection with the incident, the source said “Let first more evidence come from India.”

Mr. Sharif had formed the six-member investigation team headed by the Additional Inspector General of Punjab’s Counter-Terrorism Department (CTD) in the second week of January to look into the allegations that the JeM was behind the attack.

“Whatever facts come out we will bring them forth before everyone,” Mr. Sharif said, adding that Pakistan would go to “any length” to uncover the alleged use of its soil in the Pathankot attack.

“It is our responsibility to uncover if our soil was used in the attack. We will do this and the ongoing investigation will be completed soon,” he said.

The team headed by AIG Counter Terror Department, Punjab Rai Tahir has so far held two meetings.

Meanwhile, law enforcement agencies have not produced before court any of the suspects arrested in connection with the attack over the past two weeks since their detention.

The Government has not disclosed the number of suspects detained. Punjab Law Minister Rana Sanaullah only confirmed that Maulana Masood Azhar had been taken into “protective custody”, along with some of his “accomplices“.

Read More

Pakistan ‘must’ dismantle terror networks: Obama

In a strong message, US President Barack Obama told Pakistan on Sunday that it “can and must” take more effective action against terrorist groups operating from its soil by “delegitimising, disrupting and dismantling” terror networks there.

Describing the terror attack on the IAF base in Pathankot as “another example of the inexcusable terrorism that India has endured for too long”, Mr. Obama gave credit to Prime Minister Narendra Modi for reaching out to his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif after the attack.

“Both leaders are advancing a dialogue on how to confront violent extremism and terrorism across the region,” Mr. Obama told PTI in an interview in Washington during which he answered a wide range of questions covering Indo-US ties, terrorism and outcome of the Paris climate change summit.

Voicing his belief that the Indo-US relationship can be one of the defining partnerships of the century, Mr. Obama said that Mr. Modi shared his enthusiasm for a strong partnership and “we have developed a friendship and close working relationship, including our conversations on the new secure lines between our offices“.

Asked if the relationship has achieved its full potential, the President replied, “Absolutely not.”

On the Pathankot attack, Mr. Obama said, “We join India in condemning the attack, saluting the Indians who fought to prevent more loss of life and extending our condolences to the victims and their families.

“Tragedies like this also underscore why the US and India continue to be such close partners in fighting terrorism.”

Mr. Obama was of the view that Mr. Sharif recognized that insecurity in Pakistan is a threat to its own stability and that of the region. After the December, 2014 school massacre in Peshawar he had vowed to target all militants, regardless of their agenda or affiliation.

“That is the right policy. Since then, we have seen Pakistan take action against several specific groups. We have also seen continued terrorism inside Pakistan such as the recent attack on the university in north west Pakistan.”

The President said that he still believed that “Pakistan can and must” take more effective action against terrorist groups that operate from its territory.

“Pakistan has an opportunity to show that it is serious about delegitimising, disrupting and dismantling terrorist networks. In the region and around the world, there must be zero tolerance for safe havens and terrorists must be brought to justice,” he asserted in this third interview to PTI.

Countries should play by same rules in South China Sea

In a clear signal to China, Mr. Obama said all countries should play by the same rules in international law including freedom of navigation in the South China Sea while India can be an anchor of stability in the Asia Pacific and Indian Ocean region.

He also said India and US will continue to expand their military exercises and maritime cooperation so that the two forces become “interoperable”.

Mr. Obama said during his visit to India last year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and he agreed to a new joint vision for the Asia Pacific and Indian Ocean region.

“It’s rooted in our shared interests in a region that’s peaceful and prosperous and where all countries play by the same rules, in accordance with international law and norms, including freedom of navigation,” Mr. Obama.

The Asia Pacific region has witnessed tension after China flexed its military muscle in the resource—rich South China Sea.

The South China Sea is also a major shipping lane. Over half of the world’s commercial shipping passes through the Indo-Pacific waterways.

China claims almost the whole of the South China Sea, resulting in overlapping claims with several other Asian nations like Vietnam and the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei.

They accuse China of illegally reclaiming land in contested areas to create artificial islands with facilities that could potentially be for military use.

The U.S. has criticised Beijing for building artificial islands in the disputed sea, and has flown a B-52 bomber and sailed a guided-missile destroyer near some of the constructions China has made in recent months.

Mr. Obama also said the U.S. recognises that the Indian Ocean is vital to the security of the region and the global economy.

“Our vision recognises that the Indian Ocean is vital to the security of the region and the global economy. And it welcomes India’s determination to ‘Act East’ with stronger security and economic partnerships across the region,” the US President said.

He was replying to a question as to what role he sees for India in the emerging security situation in the Asia Pacific given what is happening and the nuclear tests by North Korea.

“We have elevated our trilateral cooperation with Japan, including on disaster response and humanitarian assistance. And we very much welcome India’s increased ties with the region.

“It’s clear that India can be an anchor of stability and security in the Asia Pacific and Indian Ocean region, and the United States looks forward to the work we can do together,” Mr. Obama said.

He said “we continue to expand our military exercises and maritime cooperation so that our forces become inter operable. We are increasing our defence trade, and we’re collaborating more closely to jointly develop defence technologies.”

Mr. Obama said as President he has worked to renew American leadership in the Asia Pacific because the security and prosperity of the region is critical to its own and that of the world.

“I am proud that, even as we continue to meet pressing challenges elsewhere in the world, we’ve rebalanced our foreign policy and are now playing a larger role in the region.”

Mr. Obama said the U.S. has strengthened alliances, modernised its defence posture, worked to build constructive relationship with China, helped strengthened regional institutions like ASEAN and East Asia Summit and expanded cooperation with emerging powers including India.

All nations accountable to meet climate commitments: Obama

Acknowledging that the Paris agreement on climate change is not perfect and not legally binding, Mr. Obama said that the mechanisms built into it will nevertheless hold every country accountable for meeting its commitments.

Describing himself as “passionate” about confronting climate change, Mr. Obama said few countries will see the effects more than India with melting Himalayan glaciers, more unpredictable monsoons and strong cyclones.

He had worked hard, including with Prime Minister Narendra Modi, for a strong global agreement in Paris last month that will put the world on the path of a low-carbon future but also allowing developing nations like India to pursue development, growth and reduce poverty, Mr. Obama said.

He was answering a question on the criticism the Indian government faced for making “concessions” at the Paris conference because developed countries had no legal binding targets on finance or emission cuts.

Mr. Obama responded by saying that no agreement, including the Paris one, was perfect.

“But we set out to craft an agreement that would attract the most ambitious action from the widest possible set of countries. And we succeeded.

“We have established the enduring framework the world needs to solve the climate crisis — nearly 200 nations committing to their own specific targets, even as we take into account differences between countries.

“India, for example, has committed to the world’s most ambitious target in renewable. And while it’s true that the Paris agreement is not legally binding, it does include a strong system of transparency, including periodic reviews and independent assessments, to help hold every country accountable for meeting its commitments,” the President said.

“Prime Minister Modi and I agree on the urgency that every nation needs to act. We also recognise that different countries are at different stages of development and therefore have different roles to play,” he said.

Mr. Obama also said that fighting climate change and harnessing clean energy will increasingly be a pillar of US-India relationship.

For example, he said, the U.S. and India joined 18 other nations in Paris to launch Mission Innovation, a ground breaking new public private partnership to spark new research, development and investment, and help the nations create the clean energy jobs and industries.

“I believe that fighting climate change and harnessing clean energy will increasingly be a pillar of the US-India relationship,” he said.

Moreover, carbon pollution is a threat to public health, and Indians like people everywhere, have the right to breathe clean air, he said.

The U.S., Mr. Obama said, recognizes its part in helping to create this problem and so was leading the global effort to combat it by reducing its own emissions.

Mr. Obama said in India hundreds of millions of people do not have electricity and it would be an injustice to consign them to a future without power for schools, homes and businesses.

“We also have to unleash investment and innovation in new technologies that will allow more progress over time and pave the way to even more ambitious carbon reduction targets in the future,” the U.S. President said.

Read More

The road from Pathankot

Weeks after a fidayeen attack on the Pathankot airbase, several key questions are yet to be answered. Among these are: if indeed there was good intelligence, why was the airbase so poorly guarded, and the intelligence not acted upon? How does one explain the gaping holes in the security architecture of a military installation situated so close to the border? Why was there no unified command and control once the attack commenced?

Also, when the Indian and Pakistani National Security Advisers (NSAs) met in Bangkok, did they, or did they not, envisage the possibility of a terror attack to try and disrupt the Foreign Secretary-level talks? If they did, what were the contingency plans in place? The biggest question of all, however, is over what Pathankot presages. Is there a message that the Pakistani deep state is sending to the Indian interlocutors? Has the Indian side missed this, or are they still deciphering it?

Pattern too familiar

The pattern — first, the announcement of holding talks; next, the collapse of the initiative; and third, renewal of the initiative after an interregnum — has been all too frequent not to realise that there is more to it than mere caprice. Nawaz Sharif’s presence at Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s swearing-in ceremony in May 2014 and subsequent developments were expected to break this cycle. Hopes were dashed when the Foreign Secretary-level talks were called off in August.

Between November 2014, when the two Prime Ministers shook hands at the closing ceremony of the SAARC summit in Kathmandu, and their meeting on the sidelines of the Climate Change Conference in Paris a year later in November 2015, there were two ‘false starts’. The latest round commenced with a meeting of the two NSAs in Bangkok. The visit of External Affairs Minister, Sushma Swaraj, to Islamabad followed. The next step was Mr. Modi “dropping in” in Lahore to wish Mr. Sharif on his birthday — all in the same month. Prospects seemed bright, till the Pathankot incident occurred.

Consequently, there is a need to introspect as to whether New Delhi is misreading the taxonomy of inherent complexities and differences in the difficult Pakistan-India equation. For instance, India tends to work towards the longer-term goal of restoring the strategic unity of the subcontinent, enlarge its strategic space, and enhance its security options. On the other hand, Pakistan’s identity is often defined by its opposition to and rejection of India. It has shorter-term goals and sees talks and negotiations as a mere stratagem.

Since taking over, Mr. Modi has put a high premium on ‘neighbourhood diplomacy’. If he is unable to establish better relations with Pakistan, it would leave his neighbourhood policy in a shambles and be a serious setback to India’s efforts to fashion the region in a manner best suited to it. Clearly, this is one of Pakistan’s objectives.

A Pakistan dominated by its military establishment is unlikely to launch an attack on an Indian airbase without a carefully contrived plan. Preparations for the attack — which carries the imprimatur of the Pakistani military and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) — would have commenced several weeks prior to the attack, and not after Mr. Modi’s visit to Lahore. It was no mere handiwork of non-state actors. The use of Jaish-e-Mohammad elements was deliberate, as the Lashkar-e-Taiba is now under the lens of international agencies. It is again no coincidence that at about the same time, a terror attack was launched on the Indian consulate in Mazar-i-Sharif (Afghanistan), which the Afghan government attributes to the Pakistani military. Unlike on previous occasions, Pakistan has not taken recourse to plausible deniability, which strengthens the belief of a message being conveyed through the medium of an attack on an Indian airbase.

This attack on a military base has not merely highlighted India’s vulnerability to such attacks, but also raised certain fundamental issues for the leadership of the two countries. In the case of Pakistan, it raises the question as to whether Mr. Sharif has control over Pakistan’s India policy or not. Also, it seeks to convey that he is in no position to determine foreign policy options. Intrinsic to this is whether in the future a Nawaz Sharif can be relied upon to deliver. Also, there are huge question marks regarding his political calculus.

Pakistan’s policy towards India has always been a bundle of inconsistent and irrational policies. This is further reinforced by the image of Pakistan as a dysfunctional state. The question, hence, is whether it is wise in the circumstances to embark upon major policy initiatives and risk further embarrassment in the future.

This question is particularly important for Mr. Modi. His trademark has been personal diplomacy, often executed with energy and panache. It has produced good results, except perhaps in India’s neighbourhood. Vis-à-vis Pakistan, the brand of ‘yo-yo diplomacy’ has given an impression that the Prime Minister’s Pakistan policy lacks both depth and vision. Care has to be taken, hence, not to arouse undue expectations. Moreover, while dealing with Pakistan, processes are often as important as the outcomes. Every Indian Prime Minister must also realise that he is especially vulnerable, since terror attacks from Pakistan will take place at regular intervals.

The Prime Minister is already skating on thin ice. He embarked on his December ‘peace offensive’ without any overture from Pakistan for resuming talks. Another attack would not merely embarrass the government and the nation, but will call for a fitting reply — more so in view of Mr. Modi’s image as a ‘Maximum Leader’.

Need for a new doctrine

What is therefore most needed today is new thinking, rather than a mere change in style. Conventional wisdom stipulates that conflicting nations hold talks to settle their differences. This has been the dictum that has driven leaders of India and Pakistan till now. It may be worthwhile to take a hard look at the utility of this course of action — given the India-Pakistan record of talks — and desist from embarking upon talks merely for the sake of it, or due to external pressure. It would not be for the first time that such a policy has been adopted, for there have been many periods in the past when the situation has oscillated between extremes of comprehensive engagement and almost complete disengagement. An extended period of disengagement at this point might prove worthwhile.

New thinking should begin by reviewing and revising the current code of conduct for relations with Pakistan. This must involve adoption of a ‘minimalist’ approach, including limiting trade relations and restricting movement of people between the two countries. More importantly, India must evolve a new ‘Counter Force Doctrine’. Operation Parakram (2001-02) exposed the inherent weakness of a large standing army as a means to counter a terror attack, including ones as serious as an attack on the Indian Parliament. Alongside a ‘Counter Force Doctrine’, the Army must convert many of its static formations on the border into more mobile and leaner units. These should be capable of sudden and swift retaliation in the event of an attack, especially when directed against military installations, key facilities and critical infrastructure.

Pakistan often accuses India of possessing a “Cold Start” doctrine, even though India denies the existence of any such doctrine. With a ‘Counter Force Doctrine’ and leaner and meaner units, India would signal that it is ready to swiftly retaliate. It would send the right message to the Pakistani deep state that they cannot exploit our democratic freedoms without facing retaliation. Once the situation improves, India could consider resorting to a step-by-step normalization process, beginning with the resumption of Track II and Track 1 1/2 dialogues, followed by a resumption of backchannel negotiations, before proceeding to full-scale talks.

Read More

Pakistan was under global pressure

The action by Pakistan, promised by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in a telephonic conversation with his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi last week, had been expected for some days, especially after pressure from several sides.

The Indian government had made it clear that there would be “no talks without action” from Pakistan on the basis of evidence and leads handed over by India about the Pathankot attackers who killed 7 Indian soldiers.

In a telephone call on Saturday, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry repeated the tough message, calling for swift action, to which Mr. Sharif had replied “the world will see our effectiveness and sincerity” in fighting terror. In two separate statements, China too had condemned the attack, saying it “shared the pain and anger of the people of India.”

In the meanwhile the Ministry of External Affairs kept up the pressure by refusing to confirm or cancel the Foreign Secretary-level talks which had been informally agreed to for January 15. Until just a day before the arrests in Pakistan, officials had said they had seen “little evidence of any action on the ground”, calling news reports about Pakistani officials moving in the case as “trial balloons.”

Also read: Pakistan detains Jaish founder Masood Azhar for questioning

Security experts also warned against reading too much into the action against Jaish-e-Mohammad, the group that was set up by Masood Azhar after he was released at Kandahar by the Indian government in 1999 in exchange for hostages on board IC-814.

India has demanded action against Azhar for the 2001 Parliament attack and the deadly bombing of the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly building in Srinagar a few months before that, as well as several terror attacks since then.

The Pakistan government, that has never explained how Azhar appeared in Pakistan shortly after his release, and has not curbed any of his recent public statements vowing violence on India, only acted against the JeM in 2003, when it banned the outfit for attempting to assassinate former President Gen. Musharraf. Azhar was put under house arrest at the time, but released subsequently.

Read More

Handlers were close to the border: NIA

The Pathankot terrorists walked 1.5 kilometres after abandoning the SUV belonging to police officer Salwinder Singh before they entered the Indian Air Force base by scaling a wall, not far from the main gate, shows a re-enactment of the sequence of events by the National Investigation Agency.

A senior government official told The Hindu that when the terrorists crossed over to India through a riverine stretch, they were probably dressed in civvies and must have changed into Army fatigues. Teams of NIA have been dispatched to all the border villages near the airbase to recover the clothes and any related evidence.

The NIA also suspects that when the terrorists crossed over to India through the riverine stretch in the Bamiyal sector, they were in touch with their handlers through a Chinese-made wireless set. Since the frequency of these sets is generally only along the line of sight, the NIA believes the handlers must have positioned themselves somewhere close to the border.

“They [the terrorists] took internal roads of the villages to approach the Pathankot airbase. They abandoned the police officer’s vehicle and went on foot for 1.5 km with heavy arms and ammunition,” said the official.

Read More

Porous airbase security worries Modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi posed some tough questions to the security establishment, particularly the Indian Air Force (IAF) personnel, during his visit to the Pathankot airbase on Saturday, days after six terrorists were neutralised there in a fierce gun battle, which lasted over 80 hours.

Mr. Modi, accompanied by National Security Adviser Ajit Doval, was reportedly disturbed by the lax security apparatus at the defence installation, a senior government official told The Hindu.

The IAF personnel admitted to the lapse in security, the official claimed. Though none of the assets like fighter jets could be targeted by the terrorists, the fact that they were parked at a five-minute walk, from the point where the attackers entered the airbase was a cause for concern for the Prime Minister, the official said.

As reported by The Hindu earlier, the terrorists entered the airbase early morning on January 1 itself, much before the alert was sounded. They climbed a tree, snipped the barbed wire along the perimeter wall and hid among the shrubs on the premises, according to the analysis of the tower location of the snatched mobile phones of former Gurdaspur SP Salwinder Singh and his jeweller friend Rajesh Verma. Terrorists first opened fire on five unarmed Defence Security Corps personnel at 3.30 a.m. on January 2.

“He asked the IAF personnel multiple times, how it was possible for the terrorists to enter the airbase? He said it was a big security lapse and should not have happened,” said another official.

Mr. Modi also shot down a proposal by the Army to pull out BSF forces from the ‘peaceful eastern border with Bangladesh’ and redeploy them as ‘second line of defence’ along the Punjab border, said an official.

“Army officials were of the view that since nothing much was happening on the eastern border except cattle smuggling, the forces should be sent to the Punjab frontier instead. The PM did not concur with this proposal,” said a senior official.

The Prime Minister was also informed that unusually the terrorists were carrying “mortars.” Officials said it was due to this that the terrorist (one or two, still not known) who took position in the airmen’s billet, could continuously attack the security forces, engaging them for almost 60 hours.

Modi didn’t fault NSG deployment

Personnel at the IAF airbase in Pathankot told Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday that the route the terrorists took had not been established.

While abducted jeweller Rajesh Verma had said he heard terrorists talking among themselves about a device with a “blue line”, the agencies had not been able to recover it from the rubble of the blown-up building or from the bodies of the four terrorists.

The official said the Prime Minister posed no questions on the decision to deploy the NSG commandos instead of the Army.

STOCKTAKING

Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited the Pathankot airbase on Saturday to take stock of the situation after recent terror attack.

» The PM spent around 90 minutes at the airbase and later did an aerial survey of the border areas in Punjab.

» The spate of terror attacks in Punjab including the July 27, 2014 attack on Dinanagar police station, was discussed at the meeting.

» Modi repeatedly asked the IAF personnel how it was possible for the terrorists to enter the airbase, implying that it was a big security lapse.

» The PM was told that due to heightened security along the Jammu border, terrorists were choosing the Punjab border to infiltrate.

» Modi shot down a proposal by the Army to pull out BSF forces from along Bangladesh border and redeploy them as a "second line of defence along the Punjab border".

Read More

BSF denies infiltration through Punjab border

The Border Security Force submitted a detailed report to the Union Home Ministry on Wednesday, saying there is no evidence of infiltration along the International Border, though the six terrorists killed in the Pathankot operation are believed to have entered through the Punjab border.

The BSF will deploy 2,000 additional personnel along the Punjab and Jammu borders to plug unfenced riverine and forest gaps.

Officials said the BSF submitted the report after Director-General D.K. Pathak undertook a forward area tour along the International Border on Tuesday, including at Bamiyal, a border village in Pathankot, which is believed to have been used by terrorists to infiltrate into the country and attack the airbase.

They said the force has put forth the details of its night “morchas” and movement of its patrol teams in these areas on December 30 and 31, when it is suspected that the terrorists crossed over from the other side and attacked the airbase.

The force, in the report, has chronicled the movements and surveillance records of its satellite-based devices and imagers that detect intrusion and illegal movement along the border to validate its point.

“The force commanders have put forth the evidence to state that nothing has gone unnoticed in the past few days,” they said.

They said it had been decided to bolster manpower to plug vulnerable gaps, especially along Punjab and Jammu, and two battalions (2,000 troops) would be required for the task in the primary stages.

An NIA team, which is investigating the case, interrogated the former Gurdaspur Superintendent of Police Salwinder Singh, who was “abducted” by the terrorists. The scene of abduction was recreated and the team visited Bamiyal. Mr. Singh was taken to the places he had visited before he, along with his jeweller friend Rajesh Kumar Verma and cook Madan Gopal, was abducted.

Read More

Deploying NSG instead of Army was a mistake: experts

Army and security circles are bewildered and angry over the way the government kept the Army from the Pathankot terror hunt, especially in the early phase, when Army troops were available in thousands close by. Instead of pressing Army units into immediate action, precious time was lost in sending a few dozen NSG commandos from New Delhi.

“None of us can believe what they did. We have two infantry divisions and two armored brigades in the vicinity. We have at least three corps headquarters in a couple of hours’ drive, and the Northern Army headquarters too. All of those troops are seasoned in carrying out counter-terror operations,” said a serving Brigadier posted close to Pathankot. “Instead, they wasted time to send a few dozen NSG commandos to the base?”

Lieutenant-General Prakash Katoch, a veteran para-commando and leading authority on special forces operations in India, said: “NSG is required for a specific target, it cannot tackle an area target.” He said that in a place such as the Pathankot airbase, the perimeter had to be secured first and combing operations to hunt down terrorists should have been initiated. “The Army is the best for that,” he said.

MULTIPLE LAPSES

The terrorist attack on the Pathankot airbase was a result of a series of systemic security failures at various levels.

1 Despite a huge concentration of Army units in and around Pthankot, why were they not tasked with securing the airbase?

2 Despite statements by SP Salwinder Singh and his cook that they were intercepted by terrorists, why did the Punjab police not act?

3 Why was the Army not deployed for combing operations?

4 Why were Garud personnel and Defence Security Corps, who are not trained for anti-terror operations, the primary responders?

5 With so many security agencies involved, who was in charge of the operation against the terrorists?

“There is no harm in sending the NSG, but then you should have a clear command and control. You cannot shove in the BSF, NSG, Army, etc, just like that. Was there a command and control there?” Gen. Katoch said.

General V.P. Malik, former Army chief, told The Hindu: “I don’t know if the NSG was the right one. They came from Delhi. It should be given to a local agency which knows the place.”

Former IAF chief Air Chief Marshal Fali H.Major said: “Garuds were raised for a different mandate for special Air Force tasks and not anti-terror operations. The DSC personnel are basically re-employed people.”

A serving Army officer said that the Army with its 10 Special Forces units, and at least the one based in Udhampur, would have been in Pathankot in a couple of hours. “We practise all the time for such operations,” he said. “Instead, you send NSG commandos in the night. Who told them that they could defend the 24 sqkm of the base with 160 commandos?”

A senior serving officer said if the government had followed the management principle of “functional foremanship” which advocates the right man for the right job, it would have saved precious lives and ensured quick elimination of terrorists.

“It was not the job of the NSG or the Garuds. It is the job of the infantry,” he told The Hindu. The local Army unit conducts a recce of the entire airbase every six months, but they were not allowed to get in when the situation came, he said.

Lt.Gen. Vinod Bhatia, former Director-General of Military Operations, told The Hindu: “The operation was not handled the way it should have been. The fact is, it has gone on for too long. If the Army was called in, they could have a better cordon as they have more strength. There was no unity of command. There has to be a single commander given the wherewithal and authority.”

“The complete infantry of the Indian Army has been fighting counter insurgency for decades,” another officer noted, adding, “This could have been handled much better with fewer casualties.” “How many times has the government airlifted the NSG for operations in the Valley? The infantry has been fighting for a long time and has been doing a good job,” he said.

Read More