If the police in the larger cities do not quickly reorient their machinery, we ourselves could be subjected to misadventures such as London and Glasgow.
EVENTS in London and Glasgow during the past few weeks raise new questions about the nature of international terrorism. They render all seductive and by-now traditional theories of the profile of a terrorist meaningless, except that it is still those in the age group of 20-30 who are the most susceptible to brainwashing in the cause of the "jehad". A terrorist is no longer the uneducated or unlettered youth raised under squalor and who has nothing to lose except his hand-to-mouth existence in an unequal and discriminatory society. Also, those who draw recruits for their dubious cause are not just content with men who profess knowledge of bomb-making. They now cast the net wider so as to bring in anyone willing to make the supreme sacrifice, as long as there is an assurance that he will not dither at the crucial moment of action.
Perhaps for the first time, a medical professional has shown himself more than willing to do anything, even at the cost of his own life, to avenge the "injustice" meted out to Islam. That a person who has taken the Hippocratic Oath can do this comes as a shock to many of us who believe in the fundamental goodness of a man who has dedicated himself to treating the sick.
The bizarre episode brought together men of three different nationalities, Iraqi, Jordanian and Indian. It again demonstrates that terrorism is truly international. Geographical and political boundaries do not matter in spite of all that many mighty governments across the globe have done to check the movement of those who are themselves terrorists or who have strong links with that class. As elsewhere, in London and Glasgow, the common link between the dramatis personae seems to have been their religion and their conviction that Islam was in serious danger. Beyond this, did they have a personal agenda?
Consider the kingpin Bilal Abdulla. He was educated in Iraq and came to the United Kingdom to improve his knowledge of English, which would have enhanced his employment prospects in that country. He is described as an extremely devout Muslim with a solid knowledge of the Quran, who would not permit even his mother to be without a scarf in his presence. Persons close to him say he was extremely exercised over the United States' invasion of Iraq, during which his family property and business were destroyed. Kafeel Ahmed (who, it is learned, left a suicide note in his Glasgow apartment) possibly got to know Bilal through an apartment-mate in Cambridge, who was part of a radical Islamic group. Kafeel Ahmed rarely mixed with any non-Muslim, even as his friendship with Bilal blossomed. He was obviously a loner with little interest in anything other than religion. He was therefore an ideal candidate for terrorist advances.
His family back home did not have a clue about his proclivities, except that they knew that since going to England he had become unusually religious. His brother Sabeel Ahmed and his cousin Mohammed Haneef, both doctors working at a Cheshire hospital, used to visit him often at Cambridge and this is how they got to know Bilal.
The presumption is that it was at these meetings that radical views were exchanged, which culminated in the aborted diabolical plans to wreck parts of London and Glasgow. What role Sabeel Ahmed and Mohammed Haneef played is anybody's guess until the investigation is over. It is just possible they were unwitting accomplices whose acquaintance with Bilal was their undoing. It would be inaccurate to commit oneself to any theories although their families cry their hearts out saying that they have been wrongly roped in. I will not be surprised if the police ultimately release them without pressing any charges.
Whatever be the outcome, one moral of the story is that it requires only one strong mind (Bilal) to brainwash others (Kafeel, Sabeel and Mohammed) who may have only the inclination but not the motivation to resort to wanton violence. There are a few issues that should cause concern to the Gordon Brown government. There is speculation that the attempted explosions on June 29-30 were meant to synchronise with the departure of Tony Blair and the arrival of the new Prime Minister. An MI5 report earlier this year definitely predicted this. Fundamentalist groups and rabid individuals may be expected to continue to embarrass the new administration, especially, Jacqui Smith, the country's first woman Home Secretary.
What should be most confounding to the authorities is the earlier theory - one that flowed from the July 7, 2005, bombings - that it was those born and raised in the UK and were undereducated and unemployed who were the main recruits to terrorism has now become tenuous. We now have full-fledged professionals educated abroad and who gained employment in the UK taking part in acts aimed at creating chaos. How does one prevent such elements from arriving in the UK, especially when they have clean records back home? Also, it is not as if all the characters involved in the latest outrage spent years in the country. Almost all of them had spent just about five to six years. How does one keep track of them? There is nothing in the UK police records that show any of them in an adverse light. The futility of dossier-building by the police cannot be better illustrated.
Most important is the role, if any, of al Qaeda in the attempted explosions. There are many myths here perpetuated by so-called experts. To al Qaeda, the UK is as despicable as the US, and hence attacks on the former are as much necessary as against the latter. But this is no reason why one should necessarily attribute every spectacular action on English soil to al Qaeda. Also, all reports point to its loosening control over organisations and nations where what al Qaeda ordains is as sacred as what is put down in the scriptures. There is a credible view that al Qaeda is now the fountainhead more for ideology and international propaganda than for the naming of targets for attack or the spelling out of specific tactics.
And it is slowly becoming irrelevant whether it is al Qaeda or some other outfit that was the inspiration for operations such as the ones in London and Glasgow. The only fact that is germane is that there are thousands of youth spread over the globe who draw inspiration from Osama Bin Laden. Many of them believe that the world has become bipolar in the form of those who owe unquestioned allegiance to Islam and those who are out to destroy Islam, and the latter have to be liquidated. The world does not have any moderate who is willing to bridge the chasm between the two.
Having said this, it is still possible to locate individuals who travel frequently to places in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, which are hotbeds that harbour active functionaries devoted solely to circulating poisonous propaganda against the West. Live contacts are maintained and plans exchanged through personal visits or the electronic media such as the Internet. It is in this background that a London Times report on the subject assumes significance. The information is that at least one suspect now under the scanner for the London-Glasgow incidents had been in contact with al Qaeda elements in Iraq. This was through telephone or e-mail. If this is true, it again highlights the mind-boggling magnitude and complexity of eavesdropping into international terrorist communication. Messages are exchanged in a cryptic, unfathomable language and between individuals who assume names that hardly make sense to law enforcement. There is the additional modus operandus of terrorists leaving messages in the "Drafts" folder of an e-mail account that is opened by the addressee, with both the latter and sender sharing a common password. In this tactic, no mail is transmitted for any enforcement agency to intercept, and therefore the message goes through without being detected. There may be any number of other methods by which electronic communication takes place between terrorist groups without the danger of being monitored by governmental authorities. This is why technology to defeat terrorism has only limited utility.
Finally, what should India do in the face of the embarrassment caused by Kafeel Ahmed and company? Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's response has been balanced and understandably non-committal. Even the slightest evidence of an attempt to bail out the three could cause problems to our image as a nation that has been a victim rather than a perpetrator of terrorist acts. At the same time, we need to identify elements in Bangalore and elsewhere in the country that could have wittingly or unwittingly abetted the London-Glasgow attacks. Any success in this difficult task and a prompt and unqualified sharing of the findings with the UK government would only bolster our image. Independent of this, any intelligence that would help to bring to book those with al Qaeda links is welcome. The police in the larger cities have their task cut out for them. If they do not quickly reorient their machinery for this purpose, we ourselves could be subjected to misadventures such as London and Glasgow.
COMMents
COMMents
SHARE