Tweet
An interview of the national security advisor by Karan Thapar ( probably the best intervewer alive today ) :
Link
Devil's Advocate: M K Narayanan
CNN-IBN
Posted Sunday , July 30, 2006 at 22:04
Updated Monday , July 31, 2006 at 10:06
The recent serial bomb blasts in Mumbai has once again showed that terrorist organisations are going all out to destabilise India. While the intelligence agencies have been pointing out that Pakistan is actively involved in the terror activities in India, the world is not yet ready to believe it.
Speaking to Karan Thapar on Devil’s advocate, National Security Advisor M K Narayanan said that there is sufficient proof to show that Pakistan is supporting terror groups like the Lashkar-e-Toiba, which is planning to attack atomic energy installations.
Karan Thapar: Hello and welcome to Devil’s Advocate. Three week’s after the Mumbai blasts and in the wake of speculation that the LeT might have infiltrated the Indian armed forces, just how vulnerable is India to Pakistan based jehadi groups. That’s the key issue that I shall raise in an exclusive interview with the National Security Advisor, M K Narayanan.
Mr Narayanan it’s believed that shortly after the Mumbai blasts, you briefed the Union Cabinet that Pakistan based Jehadi groups were involved. Do you stand by that initial assessment three week’s later?
M K Narayanan: Yes, very much. I would stand by that assessment and I think I am on stronger grounds now than when I made the observation to the Union Cabinet.
Karan Thapar: I would like to talk about that stronger ground. But, let me point out to begin with that people like the Pakistani Foreign Minister, Khurshid Kasuri or the Unites Sates Assistant Secretary of State, Richard Boucher, both have publicly expressed scepticism. What sort of proof do you have that in fact the Pakistani based jehadi groups are involved?
M K Narayanan: Well, I presume this is healthy scepticism. But, I think in the game that we are involved, proof is a little difficult to come by. If you’re looking for smoking gun, there are a few instances where you do get a smoking gun, but it is not a common occurrence. But if you can bear with me for a few minutes, let me just give you a little preamble on this point.
I think the first thing for those of us, who are victims of terrorism, is to recognise that what we in India and perhaps quite true of the rest of the world today is an entirely new genus of terrorism. It’s not a single incident. It is a chain of incidents that are taking place. It’s not as if 7/11 is a stand-alone event.
Karan Thapar: So what’s happening in India is part of a series of events worldwide?
M K Narayanan: Partly worldwide. But, in this case partly India based. What I am saying is that 7/11 is not an isolated incident in Mumbai and you can forget about it. It’s part of a larger pattern. And I say that is important because the people who are responsible for what is taking place, are today a new band of what I would call, a international fanatic group, and their objectives are not always very clear. But, the final goal is obvious.
Let’s come to Mumbai and why do we say that the LeT is involved. When you have a smoking gun, it’s obvious. When you don’t have a smoking gun, that’s where I suppose intelligence agencies have to be reasonably sophisticated, if I might use the term. You may disagree. But, I think it is a combination of intelligence, ground facts, ground realities and very importantly deductive and inductive logic as to how do you arrive at this logic.
Now if in the case of Mumbai blasts, the first important fact is that you cannot have an event of this kind unless you have a certain number of modules, which are available. We have the information that in Maharashtra, in places like Aurangabad and I’m only talking of Maharashtra, but it’s equally true to extent of Gujarat and also true to Andhra Pradesh or Hyderabad and a couple of other places and there are modules available.
Some are known, some are suspected and unfortunately we do not know some. We are aware and we have been tracking modules and it’s because of that the Aurangabad incident could take place. So the first necessity for an event of this kind was the existence of a LeT module, which exists.
The second one is that you take the explosives for instance, one of course in ammonium nitrate that is a common explosive, but there are traces of RDX involved also. It has been possible to establish some kind of connectivity, I don’t know if you can have a proof on that, between the RDX that was used there and some of the RDX that we missed out now in the Aurangabad incident, known as the LeT event.
The third item is with regard to the generic pattern of LeT activities. This is where the deductive and inductive logic comes out, in which what are their targets, what have they achieved, it’s not as if they have wasted their resources like some of the other groups. There is a pattern that’s available – the fingerprints and the footprints of these organisations.
Karan Thapar: Can I suggest something? All of this is putting together - the facts available, inductive and deductive, some of it is suggestive, some of it is corroborative, to Indians this is convincing because we in a sense want to believe it. But the problem is that the world outside is doubtful. They say at best it’s suggestive.
M K Narayanan: I have not completed. Finally where do the instructions come from? Now that’s where electronic intelligence comes in. Sometimes you have people picked up. The investigations for the Mumbai blast are still on. I don’t want it derailed.
We have a couple of foreign nationals, who are under interrogations. We are hopeful that the connections will then be enough to prove to the rest of the world. I think the proof as far as we are concerned is fairly obvious.
I would also like to tell you that there are three or four names which constantly come up when you look at these LeT modules, the controllers in Pakistan for instance - Asim Cheema, Alkama.
I don’t want to reveal everything we know about how the linkages work. There is connectivity about how the people have come in, how some of them come in through Nepal, how they are tracked. Sometimes they are lost, sometimes we don’t know about them.
But, that is the kind of thing you put together and finally when we do that, it should be enough to convince any rational person who is looking at a terrorist conspiracy, which is directed to against India. If you don’t want to believe it, then it becomes much more difficult.
Karan Thapar: Is the sort of proof that you have as good as the sort of proof America had against the Taliban and against Afghanistan when it acted in 2001?
M K Narayanan: I think what we have at this point is definitely stronger than what America had when 9/11 took place or immediately thereafter. Since then, they have got a little more information.
But the question then again is -- are you willing to believe it? If you’re willing to believe it, I think we will provide the same kind of story.
Karan Thapar: So in a sense, Richard Boucher is being a little unfair. He is using one set of standards to judge India’s proof and America used a different set of standards to judge it’s own.
M K Narayanan: He didn’t talk to any of us about that. But, he has made a statement. And if he wishes to have the information, we are willing to talk to people who want to know the facts. And certainly Mr Boucher hasn’t fallen into that category as of now.
Karan Thapar: So when Richard Boucher warned India not to jump the gun and blame Pakistan, he was in fact jumping the gun himself because he hadn’t made himself available to you to find out the nature of evidence you had.
M K Narayanan: Yes. I would certainly say so.
Karan Thapar: And if he had made himself available to find out the evidence, you believe you would have been able to convince him?
M K Narayanan: As when we are ready with facts and evidence to convince people, we will give it to them.
Karan Thapar: So you’re saying to people like Richard Boucher and the American administration -- “before you pronounce, find out from us what we have because we believe we can convince you?”
M K Narayanan: We can convince them. But, it’s also important from the point of view of the Unites States to understand the new ramifications of terror because LeT today, though it has always been a part of al-Qaeda, is becoming an even bigger threat because it has international linkages. It has contacts right across Europe. We have not come across evidence of their presence in the US but they are very active in Europe and Asia.
Karan Thapar: What you’re saying then to America, additionally, is that the LeT is the new cutting arm of al-Qaeda. Pay particular attention to it.
M K Narayanan: I say pay particular attention to it. But, I don’t know if we can say it is the cutting arm of the al-Qaeda because you have series of concentric circles. The LeT has as many international connections as also modules available as the al-Qaeda has in these areas.
Karan Thapar: And that’s why America should pay special attention to it and brush it away as an India only issue.
M K Narayanan: Exactly. This is what I hope we can get them to agree.
Karan Thapar: What about to people in your own country, like Pratap Bhanu Mehta, a great supporter of your Government. He was a member of your Knowledge Commission. Last week in The Indian Express he wrote: “That the Government would enhance it’s credibility a great deal if it could give a forthright account of this evidence to the Indian public and do so in a manner that it could be subjected to independent scrutiny. “ What do you say to people like him?
M K Narayanan: Well Pratap Bhanu Mehta is one of our more distinguished academics. It’s difficult to present information on a piece of paper to the world at large. But, I think you have to talk to people, discuss with them. There are details, which we find very difficult to talk about.
The point I’m making, even now I’m sure the intelligence agencies are going annoyed with me because, please understand particularly your interview which are very carefully scrutinised by people, like in the case of Varanasi blasts where the state police provided some information within a few weeks, I think the complete modus operandi was changed after that and some of the penetrations that were initially available were changed.
So you need to be careful because it’s not as I said one incident or it’s not a criminal offence committed in one kind.
Karan Thapar: The more details you reveal, the more quickly they change their tactics.
M K Narayanan: Yes. I shouldn’t be saying this, but I would like to tell you that at the moment we have at least two or three serious threats, on which we have information. We have to work it out. We do not know where it will take place. But, we are worried that it might take place. So what is more important -- convincing the world as such or preventing another Mumbai or another Delhi? That’s the dilemma that we face.
Karan Thapar: What are these two or three serious threats that could happen?
M K Narayanan: I think it’s an unfair question but I am saying that for instance there is information that may be one of our atomic energy installations could be the target.
Karan Thapar: Any information about individuals? Who could be picking up individuals?
M K Narayanan: It is a LeT operation. We know that. I may be excommunicated after making this public. Since you ask me, I am telling you. Far more than giving proof to any one I would like to be the one who is able to prevent this. I would like to get to the module responsible for this.
Karan Thapar: And this a serious threat?
M K Narayanan: Of course.
Karan Thapar: And a one that you take very, very seriously.
M K Narayanan: Yes.
Karan Thapar: In a sense you are saying to the people of India -- Be on your guard, whether you travel by bus or tube or trains or in cinema houses. We need all of us to be on our guard.
M K Narayanan: Yes. We need to be on our guard and I think the security and intelligence agencies have to upgrade their ability to anticipate and take steps. Travelling by bus for instance, whether we can have sensors under seats for instance, something used by the western countries or quicker method of allowing people to go through metal detectors and other things of that kind. And of course CCTV’s are passé almost in one sense, access control. You know there are a whole lot of things when you are facing what I see as a major assault against us by elements, which have a very predetermined objective.
Karan Thapar: You mean that phrase “a major assault against India”?
M K Narayanan: Yes. Let’s take the record of the past 18 months. Several attempts have been aborted, the intelligence and security agencies very seldom get credit, there have been two attempts at the Indian Military Academy, Dehradun, both aborted.
There have been a couple of attacks on scientific establishments. There has been a planned attack on one of the most important religious places that we have aborted.
Some of which they have got through, like the Indian Institute of Science and the Mumbai blasts. So, if you take a whole series of event in some the loss life has been very high and in others the profile of the target being such could create a fair amount of it. We are concerned that there is a major assault.
Karan Thapar: You’re saying that in fact there have been attempts that were aborted which if they had taken place could have been devastating. In fact the full nature of the threat is much greater than what public opinion knows. We only know what happened. What we don’t know is what was aborted and in a sense what was aborted was much worse.
M K Narayanan: Yes. It could have been. I don’t want to say worse, but could have been as bad as these.
Karan Thapar: So the nature of these is much greater than what the Indian public actually understands?
M K Narayanan: And hence the reluctance to put all your cards on the table.
Karan Thapar: Mr Narayanan there is speculation that the LeT could have infiltrated the Indian Armed Services - the Air Force, the Paramilitaries, even the Army and side by side there is also speculation that now in India we have home-grown Indian Muslim terrorist cells that may not be substantially connected either to Pakistan or the ISI or even Kashmiri based jehadi groups. How do you respond to this sort of speculation?
M K Narayanan: I think this a very interesting question and I hope you will give me a couple of minutes to expatiate on this. The intelligence agencies have been analysing the morphing of the LeT. And what they have come up against is that a great deal of effort is now being devoted to selecting or choosing people who are tech-savvy, who are more educated and are capable of holding their own than just throwing bombs.
It is in that context that about a year ago, the National Security Council Secretariat, had produced a paper in which we had drawn the new recruitment patterns, what are the new targets and the new methodologies.
In the recruitment pattern, we had drawn attention to this aspect that one has to guard against the possibility that the LeT, now that they are becoming tech-savvy in their recruits, could infiltrate into sensitive departments.
There was a reference in that to a particular point saying that there was some unconfirmed information, it’s not something that we have thrown away, they may be attempting or may have attempted an infiltration of two people in the Indian Air Force.
However, the Air Force, I must confess has done a great job, they have got into it entirely, into several layers and they haven’t come across any infiltration so probably the infiltration hasn’t taken place. But that does not mean that this will not take place. A couple of incidents have been reported in the last couple of days but I think that’s different, I don’t think that’s infiltration in the manner.
What we were really concerned there was that people would enter and you would know this and then they won’t be operating then. They will wait for an opportunity and one would never know. They become flyers and what not. What we have seen in Kashmir in the past, is that pressure has sometimes been brought families of serving personnel and they have acted as couriers.
One or two have sometimes succumbed to inducements of various kinds. The latter is something, which is not new. The former is the something of concern.
Karan Thapar: But, your are genuinely concerned about the possibility of the LeT infiltrating the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, remaining within sleeper cells, working their way upto the top and then threatening when they get into important positions. That’s a real danger.
M K Narayanan: I don’t think it is a danger. But it is a concern. And now we are concerned about the nature of operation. We know that now they are not doing small jobs, they are thinking of bigger jobs whether there is an infiltration in the armed forces or in the sensitive areas of the civilian bureaucracy, it’s a matter of concern.
Karan Thapar: What about home-grown Indian Muslim based terrorism?
M K Narayanan: This is the other thing that’s of concern. But, one of our great boasts and a very real one was that no Indian Muslim was involved in terrorist activities whether it was in Afghanistan in the 80s or the al-Qaeda in the 90s and 2000s. I think that is still true to a very large extent.
But, what has happened is that there is very manifest attempt at recruiting Indian Muslims. Quite often it’s done often either when they go for Hajj, where they are contacted with Pakistani or other controllers or in their place of work, like west Asia. And people are then induced.
Quite often the motivation is like -- you know what happened in Gujarat, there are issues, which would generate an emotive response largely combined by the financial inducement. The numbers are very small but an organisation like SIMI or rather elements in SIMI, have acted as support structure. It is true in the case of Mumbai blasts.
Karan Thapar: And these numbers could grow if the situation is not tackled adequately?
M K Narayanan: Yes. I think this is where community leaders need to play a much more important role.
Karan Thapar: How long would India remain vulnerable to terrorism?
M K Narayanan: As long as the rest of the world does not recognise that terrorism is not India centric but is the probably the most dangerous phenomenon of our age and therefore we need to deal with terrorism wherever there is support for it and wherever there is a locus for terrorism.
Karan Thapar: Which is why the Richard Boucher type of scepticism is particularly worrying you?
M K Narayanan: It is one of the most unfortunate statements that could happen in the wake of Mumbai bomb blasts.
Karan Thapar: Mr Narayanan, a pleasure talking to you.
M K Narayanan: Thank you.
Link
Devil's Advocate: M K Narayanan
CNN-IBN
Posted Sunday , July 30, 2006 at 22:04
Updated Monday , July 31, 2006 at 10:06
The recent serial bomb blasts in Mumbai has once again showed that terrorist organisations are going all out to destabilise India. While the intelligence agencies have been pointing out that Pakistan is actively involved in the terror activities in India, the world is not yet ready to believe it.
Speaking to Karan Thapar on Devil’s advocate, National Security Advisor M K Narayanan said that there is sufficient proof to show that Pakistan is supporting terror groups like the Lashkar-e-Toiba, which is planning to attack atomic energy installations.
Karan Thapar: Hello and welcome to Devil’s Advocate. Three week’s after the Mumbai blasts and in the wake of speculation that the LeT might have infiltrated the Indian armed forces, just how vulnerable is India to Pakistan based jehadi groups. That’s the key issue that I shall raise in an exclusive interview with the National Security Advisor, M K Narayanan.
Mr Narayanan it’s believed that shortly after the Mumbai blasts, you briefed the Union Cabinet that Pakistan based Jehadi groups were involved. Do you stand by that initial assessment three week’s later?
M K Narayanan: Yes, very much. I would stand by that assessment and I think I am on stronger grounds now than when I made the observation to the Union Cabinet.
Karan Thapar: I would like to talk about that stronger ground. But, let me point out to begin with that people like the Pakistani Foreign Minister, Khurshid Kasuri or the Unites Sates Assistant Secretary of State, Richard Boucher, both have publicly expressed scepticism. What sort of proof do you have that in fact the Pakistani based jehadi groups are involved?
M K Narayanan: Well, I presume this is healthy scepticism. But, I think in the game that we are involved, proof is a little difficult to come by. If you’re looking for smoking gun, there are a few instances where you do get a smoking gun, but it is not a common occurrence. But if you can bear with me for a few minutes, let me just give you a little preamble on this point.
I think the first thing for those of us, who are victims of terrorism, is to recognise that what we in India and perhaps quite true of the rest of the world today is an entirely new genus of terrorism. It’s not a single incident. It is a chain of incidents that are taking place. It’s not as if 7/11 is a stand-alone event.
Karan Thapar: So what’s happening in India is part of a series of events worldwide?
M K Narayanan: Partly worldwide. But, in this case partly India based. What I am saying is that 7/11 is not an isolated incident in Mumbai and you can forget about it. It’s part of a larger pattern. And I say that is important because the people who are responsible for what is taking place, are today a new band of what I would call, a international fanatic group, and their objectives are not always very clear. But, the final goal is obvious.
Let’s come to Mumbai and why do we say that the LeT is involved. When you have a smoking gun, it’s obvious. When you don’t have a smoking gun, that’s where I suppose intelligence agencies have to be reasonably sophisticated, if I might use the term. You may disagree. But, I think it is a combination of intelligence, ground facts, ground realities and very importantly deductive and inductive logic as to how do you arrive at this logic.
Now if in the case of Mumbai blasts, the first important fact is that you cannot have an event of this kind unless you have a certain number of modules, which are available. We have the information that in Maharashtra, in places like Aurangabad and I’m only talking of Maharashtra, but it’s equally true to extent of Gujarat and also true to Andhra Pradesh or Hyderabad and a couple of other places and there are modules available.
Some are known, some are suspected and unfortunately we do not know some. We are aware and we have been tracking modules and it’s because of that the Aurangabad incident could take place. So the first necessity for an event of this kind was the existence of a LeT module, which exists.
The second one is that you take the explosives for instance, one of course in ammonium nitrate that is a common explosive, but there are traces of RDX involved also. It has been possible to establish some kind of connectivity, I don’t know if you can have a proof on that, between the RDX that was used there and some of the RDX that we missed out now in the Aurangabad incident, known as the LeT event.
The third item is with regard to the generic pattern of LeT activities. This is where the deductive and inductive logic comes out, in which what are their targets, what have they achieved, it’s not as if they have wasted their resources like some of the other groups. There is a pattern that’s available – the fingerprints and the footprints of these organisations.
Karan Thapar: Can I suggest something? All of this is putting together - the facts available, inductive and deductive, some of it is suggestive, some of it is corroborative, to Indians this is convincing because we in a sense want to believe it. But the problem is that the world outside is doubtful. They say at best it’s suggestive.
M K Narayanan: I have not completed. Finally where do the instructions come from? Now that’s where electronic intelligence comes in. Sometimes you have people picked up. The investigations for the Mumbai blast are still on. I don’t want it derailed.
We have a couple of foreign nationals, who are under interrogations. We are hopeful that the connections will then be enough to prove to the rest of the world. I think the proof as far as we are concerned is fairly obvious.
I would also like to tell you that there are three or four names which constantly come up when you look at these LeT modules, the controllers in Pakistan for instance - Asim Cheema, Alkama.
I don’t want to reveal everything we know about how the linkages work. There is connectivity about how the people have come in, how some of them come in through Nepal, how they are tracked. Sometimes they are lost, sometimes we don’t know about them.
But, that is the kind of thing you put together and finally when we do that, it should be enough to convince any rational person who is looking at a terrorist conspiracy, which is directed to against India. If you don’t want to believe it, then it becomes much more difficult.
Karan Thapar: Is the sort of proof that you have as good as the sort of proof America had against the Taliban and against Afghanistan when it acted in 2001?
M K Narayanan: I think what we have at this point is definitely stronger than what America had when 9/11 took place or immediately thereafter. Since then, they have got a little more information.
But the question then again is -- are you willing to believe it? If you’re willing to believe it, I think we will provide the same kind of story.
Karan Thapar: So in a sense, Richard Boucher is being a little unfair. He is using one set of standards to judge India’s proof and America used a different set of standards to judge it’s own.
M K Narayanan: He didn’t talk to any of us about that. But, he has made a statement. And if he wishes to have the information, we are willing to talk to people who want to know the facts. And certainly Mr Boucher hasn’t fallen into that category as of now.
Karan Thapar: So when Richard Boucher warned India not to jump the gun and blame Pakistan, he was in fact jumping the gun himself because he hadn’t made himself available to you to find out the nature of evidence you had.
M K Narayanan: Yes. I would certainly say so.
Karan Thapar: And if he had made himself available to find out the evidence, you believe you would have been able to convince him?
M K Narayanan: As when we are ready with facts and evidence to convince people, we will give it to them.
Karan Thapar: So you’re saying to people like Richard Boucher and the American administration -- “before you pronounce, find out from us what we have because we believe we can convince you?”
M K Narayanan: We can convince them. But, it’s also important from the point of view of the Unites States to understand the new ramifications of terror because LeT today, though it has always been a part of al-Qaeda, is becoming an even bigger threat because it has international linkages. It has contacts right across Europe. We have not come across evidence of their presence in the US but they are very active in Europe and Asia.
Karan Thapar: What you’re saying then to America, additionally, is that the LeT is the new cutting arm of al-Qaeda. Pay particular attention to it.
M K Narayanan: I say pay particular attention to it. But, I don’t know if we can say it is the cutting arm of the al-Qaeda because you have series of concentric circles. The LeT has as many international connections as also modules available as the al-Qaeda has in these areas.
Karan Thapar: And that’s why America should pay special attention to it and brush it away as an India only issue.
M K Narayanan: Exactly. This is what I hope we can get them to agree.
Karan Thapar: What about to people in your own country, like Pratap Bhanu Mehta, a great supporter of your Government. He was a member of your Knowledge Commission. Last week in The Indian Express he wrote: “That the Government would enhance it’s credibility a great deal if it could give a forthright account of this evidence to the Indian public and do so in a manner that it could be subjected to independent scrutiny. “ What do you say to people like him?
M K Narayanan: Well Pratap Bhanu Mehta is one of our more distinguished academics. It’s difficult to present information on a piece of paper to the world at large. But, I think you have to talk to people, discuss with them. There are details, which we find very difficult to talk about.
The point I’m making, even now I’m sure the intelligence agencies are going annoyed with me because, please understand particularly your interview which are very carefully scrutinised by people, like in the case of Varanasi blasts where the state police provided some information within a few weeks, I think the complete modus operandi was changed after that and some of the penetrations that were initially available were changed.
So you need to be careful because it’s not as I said one incident or it’s not a criminal offence committed in one kind.
Karan Thapar: The more details you reveal, the more quickly they change their tactics.
M K Narayanan: Yes. I shouldn’t be saying this, but I would like to tell you that at the moment we have at least two or three serious threats, on which we have information. We have to work it out. We do not know where it will take place. But, we are worried that it might take place. So what is more important -- convincing the world as such or preventing another Mumbai or another Delhi? That’s the dilemma that we face.
Karan Thapar: What are these two or three serious threats that could happen?
M K Narayanan: I think it’s an unfair question but I am saying that for instance there is information that may be one of our atomic energy installations could be the target.
Karan Thapar: Any information about individuals? Who could be picking up individuals?
M K Narayanan: It is a LeT operation. We know that. I may be excommunicated after making this public. Since you ask me, I am telling you. Far more than giving proof to any one I would like to be the one who is able to prevent this. I would like to get to the module responsible for this.
Karan Thapar: And this a serious threat?
M K Narayanan: Of course.
Karan Thapar: And a one that you take very, very seriously.
M K Narayanan: Yes.
Karan Thapar: In a sense you are saying to the people of India -- Be on your guard, whether you travel by bus or tube or trains or in cinema houses. We need all of us to be on our guard.
M K Narayanan: Yes. We need to be on our guard and I think the security and intelligence agencies have to upgrade their ability to anticipate and take steps. Travelling by bus for instance, whether we can have sensors under seats for instance, something used by the western countries or quicker method of allowing people to go through metal detectors and other things of that kind. And of course CCTV’s are passé almost in one sense, access control. You know there are a whole lot of things when you are facing what I see as a major assault against us by elements, which have a very predetermined objective.
Karan Thapar: You mean that phrase “a major assault against India”?
M K Narayanan: Yes. Let’s take the record of the past 18 months. Several attempts have been aborted, the intelligence and security agencies very seldom get credit, there have been two attempts at the Indian Military Academy, Dehradun, both aborted.
There have been a couple of attacks on scientific establishments. There has been a planned attack on one of the most important religious places that we have aborted.
Some of which they have got through, like the Indian Institute of Science and the Mumbai blasts. So, if you take a whole series of event in some the loss life has been very high and in others the profile of the target being such could create a fair amount of it. We are concerned that there is a major assault.
Karan Thapar: You’re saying that in fact there have been attempts that were aborted which if they had taken place could have been devastating. In fact the full nature of the threat is much greater than what public opinion knows. We only know what happened. What we don’t know is what was aborted and in a sense what was aborted was much worse.
M K Narayanan: Yes. It could have been. I don’t want to say worse, but could have been as bad as these.
Karan Thapar: So the nature of these is much greater than what the Indian public actually understands?
M K Narayanan: And hence the reluctance to put all your cards on the table.
Karan Thapar: Mr Narayanan there is speculation that the LeT could have infiltrated the Indian Armed Services - the Air Force, the Paramilitaries, even the Army and side by side there is also speculation that now in India we have home-grown Indian Muslim terrorist cells that may not be substantially connected either to Pakistan or the ISI or even Kashmiri based jehadi groups. How do you respond to this sort of speculation?
M K Narayanan: I think this a very interesting question and I hope you will give me a couple of minutes to expatiate on this. The intelligence agencies have been analysing the morphing of the LeT. And what they have come up against is that a great deal of effort is now being devoted to selecting or choosing people who are tech-savvy, who are more educated and are capable of holding their own than just throwing bombs.
It is in that context that about a year ago, the National Security Council Secretariat, had produced a paper in which we had drawn the new recruitment patterns, what are the new targets and the new methodologies.
In the recruitment pattern, we had drawn attention to this aspect that one has to guard against the possibility that the LeT, now that they are becoming tech-savvy in their recruits, could infiltrate into sensitive departments.
There was a reference in that to a particular point saying that there was some unconfirmed information, it’s not something that we have thrown away, they may be attempting or may have attempted an infiltration of two people in the Indian Air Force.
However, the Air Force, I must confess has done a great job, they have got into it entirely, into several layers and they haven’t come across any infiltration so probably the infiltration hasn’t taken place. But that does not mean that this will not take place. A couple of incidents have been reported in the last couple of days but I think that’s different, I don’t think that’s infiltration in the manner.
What we were really concerned there was that people would enter and you would know this and then they won’t be operating then. They will wait for an opportunity and one would never know. They become flyers and what not. What we have seen in Kashmir in the past, is that pressure has sometimes been brought families of serving personnel and they have acted as couriers.
One or two have sometimes succumbed to inducements of various kinds. The latter is something, which is not new. The former is the something of concern.
Karan Thapar: But, your are genuinely concerned about the possibility of the LeT infiltrating the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, remaining within sleeper cells, working their way upto the top and then threatening when they get into important positions. That’s a real danger.
M K Narayanan: I don’t think it is a danger. But it is a concern. And now we are concerned about the nature of operation. We know that now they are not doing small jobs, they are thinking of bigger jobs whether there is an infiltration in the armed forces or in the sensitive areas of the civilian bureaucracy, it’s a matter of concern.
Karan Thapar: What about home-grown Indian Muslim based terrorism?
M K Narayanan: This is the other thing that’s of concern. But, one of our great boasts and a very real one was that no Indian Muslim was involved in terrorist activities whether it was in Afghanistan in the 80s or the al-Qaeda in the 90s and 2000s. I think that is still true to a very large extent.
But, what has happened is that there is very manifest attempt at recruiting Indian Muslims. Quite often it’s done often either when they go for Hajj, where they are contacted with Pakistani or other controllers or in their place of work, like west Asia. And people are then induced.
Quite often the motivation is like -- you know what happened in Gujarat, there are issues, which would generate an emotive response largely combined by the financial inducement. The numbers are very small but an organisation like SIMI or rather elements in SIMI, have acted as support structure. It is true in the case of Mumbai blasts.
Karan Thapar: And these numbers could grow if the situation is not tackled adequately?
M K Narayanan: Yes. I think this is where community leaders need to play a much more important role.
Karan Thapar: How long would India remain vulnerable to terrorism?
M K Narayanan: As long as the rest of the world does not recognise that terrorism is not India centric but is the probably the most dangerous phenomenon of our age and therefore we need to deal with terrorism wherever there is support for it and wherever there is a locus for terrorism.
Karan Thapar: Which is why the Richard Boucher type of scepticism is particularly worrying you?
M K Narayanan: It is one of the most unfortunate statements that could happen in the wake of Mumbai bomb blasts.
Karan Thapar: Mr Narayanan, a pleasure talking to you.
M K Narayanan: Thank you.
Comment