We'll Have Own Setup To Counter Terror: Ratan Tata

Source: TIMES NEWS NETWORK

Mumbai: Expressing lack of faith in the system to protect his property, Ratan Tata, chairman of Tata Sons, whose group owns the Taj chain of hotels, said on Tuesday that he was planning to set up his own anti-terror mechanism to protect his group's employees, guests and assets.

''We have decided that we will now look at anti-terrorism or protection of our assets and our people ourselves and we will try to create a deterrent. We will not try to create heroes who will engage with the enemy but to try and find as many invisible forms of deterring this, containing them or thwarting their efforts. That's what we are engaged in doing and we will seek external expertise to help us set it up," Tata said on Tuesday.

According to Tata, when the firing at the Taj Hotel took place, for some time there was a view that it was a gang war and the local police could deal with it.

''In the Taj, the first contingent of police came with three policemen. They were ill-equipped to handle the terrorists, in fact one of them got killed, the other got shot badly and one survived. The Navy Seals or commandos were there a couple of hours later. But we had to go through the state machinery to get them and that took time. So it was just not coordinated and easily accessible," Tata told CNN-IBN.

''You have to accept that you cannot just constantly react to something after it takes place. You have got to look at creating a deterrent and that starts with good intelligence and sustained intelligence. It starts with the ability to put into action a plan... where everyone knows what they are supposed to do rather than think on your feet after the event. It calls for mechanisms to make that happen," he said.

******************************

Responsive Analysis by Air Marshal (Retd) V K Verma

The recent acts of terrorism in Mumbai have left the whole nation feeling extremely vulnerable. The terrorists hit the common man at the railway station and the hospital, the middle social order at the Leopold’s Café and then completed their climb on social ladder when they hit Taj and Oberoi. Now everybody is insecure. Obviously, the old shield no longer saves. It needs to be discarded as it allows the bullets to penetrate – not unlike the vests adorning our police. Old solutions are inadequate.

Ratan Tata is first off the block. He has stated that he will set up his own security system and not depend on the Government agencies. Has privatisation of security already begun? As the initial emotional outburst is settling down, it is time to have a closer look at the issue involved.

From time immemorial there has been an unwritten bond between the state and the citizen – you forego certain freedoms/pay taxes and the state shall provide you with security. In the earlier times it was mainly security from external aggression and waging wars on behalf of the state. This was the role reserved for the military. In addition – against the criminal acts within the state – a police force ensured that harmony prevailed and the social fabric remained intact. Espionage and intelligence gathering were a necessity for both internal and external security. For centuries this model worked well.

This model works well whenever the enemy is well defined. Warfare and enemies have chameleon like qualities and keep changing regularly. One has to be adept at understanding their changing nature. Only then will one be able to respond appropriately. Unfortunately, large organisations become huge structures with concrete as the basic material in their construction. They acquire permanency and resist change. (That is why concrete roads have much longer life spans). Most military and police forces acquire these traits. These models respond most inadequately in the zone where terrorists/non state actors/freedom fighters/disgruntled elements operate. The state initially always treats all such issues as a law and order problem. When it is unable to control it then it brings in the military. Traditionally, both police and military are trained differently as their tasks are entirely different. More often than not the police response in terrorist situation is inadequate and when the military enters – its response is found to be too heavy. Is our model capable of handling the myriad grey shades that constitute this shift from black to white – from the imported/planted terrorist to the disgruntled home grown variety?

Two of the major planks that give the terrorist an advantage are surprise and stealth. Denying them this advantage is only possible if our intelligence gathering apparatus is good. What is our state in this zone? What is the connect between int agencies and our security forces? Generally every player has his own int machinery and connections to the specialised int agencies. On paper the dots join but in reality the connections are extremely patchy. Our nation has a federal structure where law and order is a State subject handled by the State police force and the military is under Central Govt. When terrorism strikes, should the State Govt treat it as a law and order issue or seek central assistance for military response? Do we have structures/connections/contingency plans to cater for the grey zones that surface with a predictable regularity? This model is already very complex. Now imagine the delays/inefficiencies where the State Govt and the Central Govt belong to different coalitions/parties. Add another neighbouring state that is governed by another party. Politics creeps in and makes sure that our diversity which is actually our real strength becomes the weakness. Suddenly you are staring at a model that defies comprehension. Two things become crystal clear – decision making will be extremely weak and time consuming and that synergy will be entirely absent in such a model.

Terrorists study and understand all this. They study the weaknesses in the structures and the inability of the relevant organisations to connect appropriately in a timely fashion. Terrorists exploit this time loop by employing the latest in communications technology to remain networked and ahead. Pick up any military magazine and the phrase “the future warfare will be net centric” is bound to feature in it. The terrorists have been networked for a very long time and our military is only discussing it and taking baby steps towards actualising it. Obviously the military has to play a lot of catch up and the police is obviously miles behind. With the latest in communication technology in their hand it is natural that they are ahead in decision making and hence are able to surprise us regularly.

One of the most overused photograph from the recent Mumbai crisis was Kasab with his impressive suite of weaponary – armed to the teeth – at the CST station. The TV networks kept describing the cutting edge in weaponary adorning him. Compare this with the photograph of our soldiers in exercises with Americans and Chinese. Again a massive catching up is needed. The terrorist has funds at his disposal and a willing market which sells it to him. Our soldiers too have access to both the money and the market. There is no shortage of funds or of willing suppliers. The difference is mainly in our procedures for procurement. Our procedures make sure that our soldier is always equipped for the last war and never ready for the next one. Even when Bofors gun proved its worth in Kargil, we shy from it on suspicion. In the garb of checking corruption, the procedures introduce so many checks and balances that we end up in situations where no purchase is possible. The end result is that the police constable has to manage with only his three not three and the soldier with something slightly better.

What does all this point to? That the current methodology and the current organisations that are tasked to be responsible for our security are inadequate. A total relook and restructuring is necessary. Just as armour will not help you in mountainous terrain, our current structures will not provide you with the appropriate answers while tackling terrorism.

Then should we go the Ratan Tata way and privatise our security? Give it a try. His ‘Nano’ model shook the automobile world. Maybe he will succeed where our security apparatus has failed to provide a solution. One does not know what Ratan Tata has conjured up in his mind. Many solutions are possible at the bottom end of the confrontation. They will be able to minimise losses. A certain deterrence will also result from these solutions. But if your aim is to let the citizen feel secure then the necessary action is at the apex national level.

At the national level we have to get our ‘intelligence’ act together. Only if it provides fruitful information will we be able to pre-empt terrorist acts. Two more legs of this triad demand attention. The financial feed that reaches the terrorist organisations has to be strangled. The third leg of this triad which needs to be broken is the nexus terrorists have built with the organised crime networks. All these three legs can be fractured as the technology needed to do so is available to us. What is needed is to create a proper special organisation with interagency link up that is able to collect all the data needed, sift it, analyse it and then get the appropriate actioning agency to act. Once this is done the ability of the terrorist organisations will dwindle automatically. Only then will our citizen be able to breathe a lot more freely.