Opinion - Letters to the Editor   

Fighting terror

This refers to the report that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will impress on world leaders attending the G8 summit the need to stand with India in the war against terrorism — the last three words representing language he has rarely used before (July 17). Such rhetoric will take us nowhere in our fight against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. Pakistan has denied the existence of any terrorist outfit in areas controlled by it. The G8 leaders are unlikely to join us wholeheartedly in our fight. We have to fight terrorism on our own. We have no option but to resort to strong pro-active measures now that the nation has reached the limits of its tolerance.

Col. C.V. Venugopalan (retd.),
Palakkad, Kerala

* * *

The Prime Minister's clear message to Pakistan that it should choose between sponsoring terror and continuing the peace process is welcome. The Pakistani leadership must stop riding two horses, which would be detrimental to the interest of both the countries.

R.K. Kutty,
Bhopal

* * *

The editorial "Mumbai: what next?" (July 17) rightly points out that the functioning of the Mumbai police leaves much to be desired. Such inadequate functioning is true of the police force of almost all other States. Terrorism should not be treated as a law and order problem under the State police. A separate anti-terrorist cell under the direct charge of the Centre should be created.

M.K.B. Nambiar,
Mahe

* * *

The editorial has driven home the need to think beyond routine condemnation of horrifying terror attacks. The political rhetoric and media hype over the Mumbai blasts will fade away slowly. We Indians have extreme tolerance and short memory. No one talks about the Coimbatore blasts, the IISc shootout or the Kumbakonam school fire any more. This attitude of the people encourages the authorities to take things lightly after the initial reaction dies down.

L. Rangarajan,
Vadodara, Gujarat

* * *

The state alone cannot detect and prevent terrorist attacks. The terrorists have the advantage of anonymity and time. They pick and choose targets to cause maximum destruction. As they do not care for human lives, including their own, it would be futile to enact stringent laws, which could put innocent citizens in trouble. There is no substitute for eternal vigilance.

D.B.N. Murthy,
Bangalore

* * *

While governments are far from perfect, blaming them after every disaster strikes will serve no purpose. A small piece that can be carried inconspicuously in a shopping bag can produce a strong enough explosion to kill. With millions of people using the railways, it is well nigh possible to check every passenger. Instead of levelling accusations that will demoralise the police and others, useful suggestions can be made.

K.S. Sarma,
Chennai

* * *

The article "Limit to tolerance but options are limited too" (July 17) gives a studied and mature view, and suggests a pragmatic response to terrorism. The impulsive sabre-rattling indulged in by a section of the media and opportunist political spectrum can only play into the hands of those behind the gruesome acts. Expedited scientific investigation and enhanced intelligence apparatus, followed up by necessary pressure on Pakistan to deliver on the promises to dismantle the terrorist training camps should be the endeavour of the Government.

Kasim Sait,
Chennai

* * *

The Government's priority should be to do good policing and build an effective intelligence work. The BJP's hawkish reactions will not bear fruit, as proved during the NDA regime. Despite POTA being in force, Parliament was attacked. Stringent black laws cannot eradicate the menace of terrorism. What is required is sincere action from the powers that be.

N. Divakar,
Mysore

* * *

Acts such as MISA, TADA, and POTA were all draconian in nature. But the justification for such laws is found in the A.K. Gopalan versus State of Madras case. In a landmark judgment, Chief Justice H.J. Kania observed: "Preventive detention has been given a constitutional status in India. The sinister looking feature ... is incompatible with the promise of the preamble. But it has doubtlessly been designed to prevent an abuse of freedom by anti-social and subversive elements which might endanger the national welfare of an infant republic."

N. Chandrasekaran,
Chennai

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Pakistan on notice
Developing drugs for the poor
The changing role of HR professionals
In the name of charity
Another attempt at confidence building
The march of folly
Setback for peace
Corrections and clarifications
Both to blame
Fighting terror
Disappointing

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu