Under the political dispensation that presides in Delhi, incompetence and a lack of aptitude for the job are not considered a reason for the sack.
It speaks volumes about our political system that it requires grisly events of Mumbai and the loss of 200 innocent lives and much of the prestige it was acquiring as an emerging power to persuade Mr Shivraj Patil to resign as Home Minister. Only the terrorist invasion of
Mumbai, not the strikes at Ajmer, Jaipur, Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Hyderabad and Delhi at regular intervals during the last one year, shook Mr Patil to think of concepts like moral responsibility and accountability in public life.
The people had begun switching off channels whenever he came out of his cloistered existence amidst files in North Block to make banal statements on the TV. The Congress allies also began protesting. Only then it dawned on the Congress High Command that Mr Patil had become a liability for the party before the elections, and something needed to be done.
Whether he was asked by the Prime Minister, who has the natural tendency to be too polite to overstaying guests, or whether ultimately a signal came from Number 10
Janpath, or Mr Patil chose to send in his papers on his own volition, will be an exercise in sophistry. The public outrage apparently convinced Number 10 – and consequently members of the Congress Working Committee last night – that it was no longer possible for the party’s voluble spin
doctors to put a gloss on their Home Minister’s image.
Mr Patil’s exit from the scene may not itself deter a future terrorist strike just as his presence in the Manmohan Singh government made no difference to the situation on the ground. Yet, it conveys the impression that the government at last is serious in doing something about the worst danger the country has faced over decades.
The rot in the security set-up across the country has gone too deep requiring a surgery and not just a homoeopathic dose. More heads must roll at all levels at the Centre and in the states to allow the induction of those who are conscious of the magnitude of the security threat and competent enough to earn confidence of the country.
Much more, however, needs to be done to make the Indian state acquire the will to act, certainly in the areas where a question of national security and survival are involved.
Often in tackling terrorism gaps are found that need to be bridged. After
Mumbai, the intelligence agencies of the Centre and Maharashtra, the Coast Guards and the Indian Navy have much to answer for. There could be many system faults that were known but not attended to over the years. Men of the National Security Guards have shown tremendous bravery and courage but it is strange that for no fault of theirs it took them nine hours to reach Mumbai from Delhi during which time the terrorists had dug in and killed a lot of people. Why all the major cities in the country and sensitive spots were not provided with NSG units to tackle contingencies cannot be explained.
More chinks will be found in the armour when experts sit and analyse the operational detail emerging from
Mumbai. The earlier they do, the better it is.
Operational nuts and bolts apart, terrorism is a continuing war meant to bring down India on its knees, scuttle its economy that had become a
talking point around the world, and the psychology to settle old scores unfortunately still lingering on the subcontinent.
It has been noticed over the years that in the name of federalism and coalition politics, the authority of the Centre has
grievously weakened and the states are going their way in many vital areas, unmindful of a national perspective.
Under the pretext that law and order is a state subject in the jurisdictional division of responsibility, the states have been blocking reforms that could make the Centre strong enough to tackle threats to security.
The states have particularly succeeded in blocking the setting up of a central nodal agency to fight any threat to national security. There are several other areas where the states have resisted central advice and intervention, getting away with many a lapse.
Considering the present situation, it has become imperative for the Centre to set up a central nodal authority – whatever its label – to draw a national strategy to fight any threat to national security.
It is possible to set up the new nodal agency without amending the Constitution. But in case the Centre wants to arm itself with power to set up one, the people under the present climate would support an amendment of the Constitution, maybe, in the winter session of Parliament.
The country cannot be allowed to be weakened just because of the flotsam and jetsam who come to power in the states.
