MUMBAI TERRORIST STRATEGY? - December 1, 2008

Striving to shape their world view, and draw lines of conflict, through the initial terrorist action and the anticipated provoked response(s) and also preempt a new US President.

For a terrorist action that appears to have been so particularly planned on a tactical, operational level, the Mumbai onslaught seems from the outset to have been ambiguous as to its strategic objective(s). On the basis of the resources committed by the terrorists and what from the outset appeared as a "no-return mission," it can be gleamed though that the strategic objective was paramount rather than an afterthought to an orgy of violence.

The attacks were intended to be prolonged gripping the regional and global public audience. It was almost played out like a multi day sports match with the drama, the emotions and the implication constantly ratcheted up. Most importantly, in order for the terrorists to achieve their objective they are relying upon a certain response from the governments and peoples caught up in the composed drama that they set out upon Mumbai as the stage.

MUMBAI AS STAGE

It is always dangerous to speculate as to the motives of those who would manipulate all of us through terrorism. We may be inclined to give too much credit to grievances. On the other hand, we perhaps might overlook psychological factors. Regardless, prudence first calls upon all of us to take caution that we do not overplay the response right into the terrorists' strategic goals. From the terrorists' perspective, there are no innocent victims. They consider themselves as well as those who may even identify with them as necessary collateral victims in order to achieve some presumably broader objective.

The Mumbai assault, both in its prolonged tactical strategy, direct challenge to Indian government authority and deliberate targeting of western nationals and interests can be exposed as having the following objectives:

Bring down current Indian Congress Party led Government and undermine India's standing as secular state: The Mumbai terror attacks were specifically designed in their ever prolonged character to make the current Indian Government appear powerless to stop it, ineffectual. This has already provoked one key resignation, (the Home Minister). Further, it could goad an electorate backlash returning Hindu ultranationalists to political power and alienating moderates and non-Hindus. The presumed "Muslim radical" terrorists want their own opposite within the Hindu community to take charge in order to polarize. The most effective tonic to radicalism or terrorism is the middle ground and moderates. The most effective catalyst in mobilizing radicalism from within is the extremist of the "other side."

Spark anti-Muslim violence within and perhaps beyond India: India, including Mumbai, has been witness to not so distant brutal sectarian violence. Muslims have been the victims of Hindu mobs aroused by some previous terror attacks purportedly launched by presumed "Islamic radicals." Such mob violence has in fact been initiated by Hindu-ultranationalist gangs against Christian as well as Muslim minority communities even without any apparent provocation. There has been a sustained effort to undermine India's secular status in favor of one identified with Hindu fundamentalism where Christian and Muslim influences are projected as coercive or alien and in need of eradication. The ongoing struggle over Kashmir and the not so infrequent repression of its predominantly Muslim population by Indian security forces has been a longstanding grievance. In the recent past, thousands have been murdered in such mob violence, and Hindu-ultranationalist authorities in some Indian states have been slow to confront or punish the perpetrators and there have been even accusations of acquiescence or complicity. The Mumbai terrorists are not averse, and exactly to the contrary, to inciting anti-Muslim mobs. Thousands of innocent Muslims would become martyrs, in turn provoking a new wave of reprisals and counter reprisals.

Provoke Indian Pakistani animosity: India and Pakistan have been at odds since the partition of the Indian subcontinent. Kashmir, (with exception of Bangladesh war), has been the major source of friction and several wars. Over the last few years though, terror bombs targeting Indian population centers, Hindu and Muslim, have almost inevitably provoked charges by New Delhi that Pakistani elements were behind the attacks. Most recently there has been a sustained effort at rapprochement between New Delhi and Islamabad. The Mumbai attack has unfortunately caused a reversion to the previous accusations and mistrust, (and this was at least one of the motives of the terrorists). Regardless of whether the terrorists originated from or were trained in Pakistan, the Mumbai attackers seemed to make certain that they would leave an operational trail implicating a Pakistani source. Even Mumbai's geographic location as international seaport would promote suspicions of international conspiracy. (Unfortunately though New Delhi has been too frequently disposed to blame "outside" forces in order not to acknowledge internal causes such as marginalization of minority populations and the unsettled issue of Kashmir).

Driving wedge between Pakistan and western allies: With Al-Qaeda looking to secure a base in northwest Pakistan's chaotic provinces, it has become critical for the terror masterminds to drive a wedge between the Pakistani Government and the US and other western allies. By overtly targeting western nationals, the Mumbai terrorists wanted to provoke an impulsive reaction intruding upon and targeting Pakistani territory. From the terrorists' perspective, Pakistan as a conflict zone would be a strategically welcome broadening of the war from Afghanistan, (at least as compared to Pakistan as a stabilizing US and NATO ally). Pakistan, with its significantly larger population, technological development and military capability would be a qualitatively and quantitatively much tougher challenge for the US and western allies. Of course, the nuclear arsenals of India and Pakistan only further complicate the situation as well as ratcheting up the potential stakes. 

"Clash of Civilizations": This phrase, "clash of civilizations," may have been formulated in the western media, but it is the objective, the world view of radicals in the predominantly Islamic world, (and of extremists elsewhere). The terrorists were not focused on achieving any particular objective for Muslims in India. Rather, their agenda was to initiate a ripple which would be ultimately felt in the Muslim world and would place it into conflict with and isolate it from the rest of the globe. On one side would be India, Israel, European allies and the US while on the other would be the "Muslim peoples."

DO NOT ALLOW THE TERRORIST TO ADVANCE THEIR AGENDA

The Mumbai terror attacks were intended to preempt the challenge posed to their world vision by an incoming Obama Presidency. President Obama is inconsistent with their world vision of irreconcilable global conflict, at least in his election as President of the United States. If we focus only on the narratives of the terrorists' brutality we could lose sight of their rationale for perpetuating the crime. They are committed to a homogeneous vision. If democracies also compromise values of a pluralistic, open society in reaction to the Mumbai attacks then the terrorists will have achieved their strategic objective.

Muhamed Sacirbey

--------------------

Mr. Muhamed Sacirbey holds B.A. degree in history and J. D. degree from Tulane University in New Orleans. He also holds M.B.A. degree from Columbia University. Prior to becoming Bosnia’s Foreign Minister and Ambassador to the United Nations, he practiced as an attorney in New York City and worked for several years as an investment banker. He presently writes his book “A Convenient Genocide, in a fishbowl ” and is a commentator on human rights and political issues.

--------------------