FBI AFFIDAVIT AGAINST HEADLEY: REFERENCES TO INDIA

INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR--PAPER NO.574

B.RAMAN

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of the US had filed an affidavit in the district court of the Northern district of Illinois on October 11,2009, justifying its decision to arrest David Coleman Headley, originally known as Dawood Gilani till 2006. The evidence against him described in the affidavit is based on the interception of his telephone conversations and e-mail communications between October,2008, and October 3,2009, when he was arrested and the information gathered from him after his arrest.

2. The affidavit refers to three of his ring leaders in Pakistan----Ilyas Kashmiri, formerly of the Special Services Group (SSG) of the Pakistan Army who subsequently joined the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI), a contact of Ilyas Kashmiri, who is referred to as Individual A and an operative of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), who is referred to as LET member A. While the affidavit identifies Ilyas by name and gives considerable details of his background, it refrains from identifying the other two. The reasons for this are not clear.

3. While the major portion of the affidavit is about the attempted use of Headley by Ilyas to carry out a terrorist strike in Denmark, there are also references to the LET's interest in using him for a terrorist strike in India. Some media reports had initially described Headley as a White convert to Islam, but the affidavit indicates that he was a Chicago resident (US citizen?) of Pakistani origin, who claimed to have studied in the military cadet school of the Punjab Government at Hasan Abdal.

4. He would appear to have come to the notice of the FBI in October, 2008, when he had posted an entry in a chat group of former students of the cadet school expressing his anger over the insult of the Prophet in a cartoon published by a Danish journal. Subsequent investigation brought out that Headley hade been associated with the LET at least since 2006, if not earlier, and had been trained by it. He had made visits to India, but the affidavit makes no reference to any role played by him in the Mumbai suburban train blasts of July 2006 and the terrorist attacks of 26/11. He was in Pakistan during the period between December 2008 and June 2009. During his stay,he visited the Waziristan area, met Ilyas for the first time and swore his loyalty to him.

5. The references to India in the affidavit have been extracted below:

Lashkar-e-Taiba Shifts its Focus From Denmark to Potential New Attack in India

In July and August 2009, HEADLEY exchanged a series of emails with an individual that HEADLEY later identified to FBI agents as Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A. Certain of these emails are summarized below.

On July 3, 2009, Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A sent HEADLEY an email in which Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A said, "I need to see you for some new investment plans."

On July 8, 2009, HEADLEY sent Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A an email which stated, in part: "What do you want me to do? Where are you interested in making investments?"

In another email on July 8, 2009, HEADLEY told Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A that "I think when we get a chance we should revisit our last location again and say hi to Rahul."Following his arrest, HEADLEY acknowledged that, in this email, "Rahul" refers to a prominent Indian actor with the first name "Rahul."

Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A replied to the above email on July 8, 2009 and told HEADLEY in an email that "to see Rahul is a good idea coz have some work for you over there too. Matters are good enough to move forward...."

On July 9 , 2009, HEADLEY responded:"When you say "move forward" do you mean in the North direction or towards Rahul? Also in the future if we need to meet to discuss anything, do I have to come all the way over there or can we meet somewhere in the middle like Africa or Middle East?"

The same day, Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A responded that "I mean towards Rahul."On July 10, 2009, HEADLEY sent an email to Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A in which he stated:"I would like to know a few things if you can tell me:1) What is the status with the Northern project, i's it still postponed indefinitely?2) The visit to Rahul's place, is it for checking out real estate property like before,or something different and if so tell me what you can please. Also is it exactly in Rahul's city or different one?3) How long do you think I will need to stay at Rahul's place to complete this task?4) Will I have to stay there continuously for a while, or back and forth like before?"

Based on my (FBI agent's) review of this and other communications, I believe that HEADLEY had inquired of Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A whether the Denmark project was on hold, and whether the visit to India that Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A had asked him to undertake was for the purpose of surveilling targets for a new terrorist attack.

Later on July 10,2009, Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A responded to HEADLEY's email, stating, in part, that:"There are some investment plans with me, not exactly at Rahul's city but near that. Rest we can decide when meet according to your ease".

In an email to Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A on July 16, 2009, HEADLEY stated, in part:"One very important thing I need to know please is that how long do you need me for,meaning how long should it take me to finish my work, in your opinion. And is it really urgent? Before it seemed that the Northern Project was really urgent."

After Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A responded on July 18, 2009, that "it may take somewhere between 2 to 4 weeks," HEADLEY replied on July 19, 2009, that "I think I can manage it," and that he would be available in October. He closed his email by asking"Is the Northern Investment definitely postponed for now?"

Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A and HEADLEY continued to exchange emails through late August 2009, when HEADLEY told Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A that he "will be there end of next month."

I (FBI agent) understand these emails to reflect that beginning in July 2009, Lashkar-e-Taiba Member A was placing a higher priority on using HEADLEY to assist in planning a new attack in India than on completing the planned attack in Denmark.

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd) , Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute for Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

HOW CREDIBLE IS OBAMA? CHINESE MUSINGS ON EVE OF HIS VISIT

B.RAMAN

President Barack Obama is undertaking a four-nation Asia trip from November 12 to 19, 2009.He will be in Japan on November 12-13. From there, he will fly to Singapore to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit and then visit China and South Korea before returning to the US.

2. As his visit to China approaches, the Chinese media have been carrying an increasing number of articles on his personality, his policies, the developing Sino-US relations and China's relations with the rest of the world.

3. A perusal of the writings would show that India is not the only country where there are lots of nostalgic memories of his predecessor George Bush. Even in China, there are analysts who are more positive on Bush in retrospect than on Obama. They view Obama essentially as a man of "pretty words" not matched by appropriate action. They still remember with gratitude how Bush firmly opposed calls for a boycott of the Beijing Olympics since he felt that such a boycott would humiliate the Chinese people.

4. Attention has been drawn to the fact that no other US President has undertaken so many foreign visits in his first year in office as Obama has and delivered so many beautiful orations. Have these visits and orations contributed to a better perception and understanding of the US in the rest of the world? The Chinese analysts are not sure of this.

5. The growing skepticism about Obama is reflected in an article titled "Obama needs deeds, not just pretty words" written in the "Global Times" of November 8, 2009, by Tian Wei, a Chinese TV anchor, who was posted in Washington DC during the first term of Bush and who now hosts on the Chinese TV a talk show called "Dialogue" .

6. She writes: "Obama deserves enormous credit for making the political choice to take the time to do his Asia trip. He is not like his predecessor Bill Clinton, who skipped two Asian summits because of domestic political challenges. Obviously, Obama is not coming to Asia to show off American strength this time, as her weaknesses are currently much more apparent. Rather he seems to believe it is essential to restore American leadership and solve the problems by involving others in the process as well. With this trip to Asia, Obama will have visited 20 countries in his first year in office, the most of any US President in history. This is certainly a great record by itself. But what is more important is not just his sincerity but also his credibility. People naturally compare former US President George W. Bush and Obama. Even though the latter can be more eloquent in delivery, the former, once he said he was going to do something, no matter how difficult it was, followed through. For example, when former President George W. Bush said he was going to attend the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics, he did despite a great deal of pressure not to do so. When Bush made clear in the White House when meeting with his Chinese counterpart President Hu Jintao that Washington was against the change of status quo from either side of the Taiwan Straits, he followed through by making this clear to Chen Shui-bian, then Taiwan leader. We can also consider the domestic situation facing the Obama administration. Despite rhetoric against protectionism, the White House did sign a bill limiting the imports of Chinese tires for the protection of a minor interest group, the United Auto Workers. We have to wonder if this administration still has enough political capital to move forward on some of the crucial issues for the international community?Even if there is enough political capital, is it willing to invest? Is the US Congress finally going to give it the authority to move forward? Many believe that the nature of relations between Beijing and Washington has been changing over the years, and has now reached a truly global level over issues like climate change and the financial crisis. As the nature of the relationship evolves, it is especially crucial for the Obama administration to show its credibility if it wants the Chinese or others in Asia to step up."

7. Another interesting discussion in sections of the media has been on the continuing distrust of China in the civil societies of many countries. China's relations with Russia have been described as one of "hot governmental relations" and "cold non-governmental relations." However much the two Governments might have strengthened the State-to-State relations, distrust at the people-to-people level due to historic reasons continues to persist. China has not been able to remove this distrust.

8. Though the Russian and Chinese people's perceptions of each other have been cited as an example of the negative people-to-people relations, this applies with equal validity to China's relations with India, the US and many South-East and East Asian countries. As I had pointed out in my past articles on Sino-Indian relations, persisting distrust of China in large sections of the Indian civil society stands in the way of any substantial improvement in the bilateral relations despite the keenness of the two Governments to strengthen the strategic relations.

9. In an article titled " Balance of Powers in Asia Inevitable" written by Ding Gang, who has been described as " a senior editor with the People's Daily" ( "Global Times" of November 8,2009), the concerns and suspicions aroused in Asia by China's rise as a major power have been sought to be analysed in an objective manner. These suspicions and concerns are behind the desire of many countries, including Singapore, that the US should continue to play an active role in Asia.

10. The article says: "It is an open secret that many Asian countries want to restrict China's rise with the help of the US. In a recent speech by Singaporean founder and "Minister Mentor" Lee Kuan Yew on the Charlie Rose show in the US, he warned that the US risks losing global leadership as China rises militarily and economically.This made some Chinese netizens very unhappy, since Lee's reliance on the US as the leading power seemed to disregard the feelings of the Chinese people. However, given the current status of the Asia-Pacific region, it is easy to understand Lee's concern. Nowadays the Asia-Pacific region is seeking a new balance of political and economic structures, a shared goal for all Asia-Pacific countries after the Cold War. Who needs to be "balanced?" Frankly speaking, the target is China. No matter what China thinks, its rise brings changes to the original balance of the Asia-Pacific region. It is not a small challenge for any Asia-Pacific country to deal with a rapidly growing power. Accordingly, their concern of loss of possible national interests is understandable."

11.It adds: " There has never been a common security mechanism for consultation and cooperation established by Asian countries. During the Cold War, a number of Asian countries were allied to the US in order to restrict the Soviet Union and China. The US was, is and will, in the foreseeable future, be the dominant force in the region. Despite the relative decline in its power, it is still far from becoming a second-class country. Therefore, that some Asia- Pacific countries want to rely on the US to balance China's growing strength is entirely natural. To lead Asian affairs is not among China's goals, even if China becomes the strongest power in Asia. Being a leader is not aligned with China's philosophy, and it is not considered a favorable choice. Instead, Asia needs a new security structure based on consultation and cooperation. Its order cannot rely on a single leader, and no such leader will exist in the future. Therefore, maintaining a balance of power in Asia is not bad for China. ...... For us to get along with other Asian countries in the future, we have to understand their concerns. The Chinese people should also have patience. China is not strong and popular enough to make other countries neglect the US. Even if in the future China enhances mutual trust with other Asia-Pacific countries through continuous efforts, a balance of power may still be necessary. For the gradual development of a multipolar world, the best solution is to keep this balance. China needs to learn to adapt to this reality in order to be a responsible major power."

12. There is thus an interesting debate going on between the advocates of a "China first" policy who insist on a firm assertion of what they look upon as China's core interests even at the risk of driving some Asian countries into the arms of the US and those who recognise the continuing reality of a distrust of China and want that China should take note of this distrust and address the causes for it. They look upon the attempts of some countries to strengthen their relations with the US as not the reflection of an anti-China conspiracy, but as the natural outcome of the distrust of China. ( 9-11-09)

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-Mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

CHINA SMILES AT INDIA, US

B.RAMAN

During the last one month or so, Chinese policy-makers have suffered two diplomatic set-backs-----one at the hands of India and the other at the hands of the US.

2. The diplomatic set-back at the hands of India relates to the visit of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh, which the Chinese claim as their territory and refer to as Southern Tibet.For over 10 weeks, the Chinese Communist Party controlled media and spokespersons of the Chinese Foreign Office have maintained a high-profile campaign against the visit. The purpose of the campaign was to exercise pressure on the Government of India not to allow His Holiness to go to Arunachal Pradesh. The Government of India has declined to intervene in the matter and maintained the position that as a Buddhist leader, His Holiness was free to go anywhere in India so long as he does not indulge in any activities of a political nature. While Beijing tried to project the visit as part of His Holiness' political machinations to split Tibet from China, New Delhi politely, but firmly stuck to its stand that the visit was purely a spiritual one in his capacity as a highly venetrated leader of the Buddhists.

3.Now that China's high-profile media and diplomatic campaign against the visit has failed to produce results, the question is what next. Will the visit have a negative impact on Sino-Indian relations? Will it add to Sino-Indian cross-border tensions? Will China further step up the diplomatic and media pressure on India as it sought to do against France and some other European Union countries last year to pre-empt a movement for the boycott of the Beijing Olympics?

4.It will take time for clear-cut answers to these questions to emerge, but there are already some indicators to show that Beijing is keen not to allow its set-back to affect its over-all relationship with India. After a long time, the Party-owned "People's Daily" has come out on November 4,2009, with an unsigned article on Sino-Indian relations, which is refreshingly positive. The text of the article is annexed.

5. After reviewing the over-all relations, the article says: " Generally speaking, Sino-Indian relations witnessed smooth development over the past decades, but some pending issues and unnecessary misunderstanding have plagued bilateral ties. It is of vital importance to combat various pressures and challenges through collaboration. Media from both countries should play a constructive role, creating a healthy environment to facilitate public opinion. China and India, the two neighbors with the world's largest population, are forging ahead towards peace and development, which is the common wish of both leaders and people."

6.The diplomatic set-back at the hands of the US related to the Chinese demand that the Barack Obama Administration should hand over to China six Uighur detenus in the Guantanamo Bay detention centre against whom no evidence warranting their prosecution on terrorism-related charges could be found. The Chinese contended that these Uiighurs belonged to the Islamic Movement of Eastern Turkestan, which is an associate of Al Qaeda. The Obama Administration politely turned down the Chinese demand and sent the Uighurs away to the Pacific island nation of Palau. It has stuck to the policy of the Bush Administration of not handing over to China Uighur suspects detained in Afghanistan on suspicion of their involvement with Al Qaeda----- a suspicion which could not be ultimately proved. Human rights and Congressional circles in the US have been strongly opposed to these Uighurs being handed over to China lest they be executed by the Chinese as terrorists.

7. On November 6,2009, the Government-controlled Xinhua news agency disseminated a strongly-worded criticism of the US action in which the US was accused of connivance with the Uighur terrorists and of double standards in counter-terrorism, but this commentary seems to be a purely proforma expression of Chinese unhappiness over the US action, which will not affect Sino-American ties.

8. On the eve of the forthcoming visit of President Obama to China, to which both countries attach considerable importance, the Chinese media and Government spokesmen continue to highlight the positive in the bilateral relations without overplaying the negative. This is evident from an article on Sino-American relations carried by the "People's Daily" on November 2,2009. It has been written by Wang Xinjun, an associate researcher of war theory and strategy at China's Academy of Military Sciences.

9. This article, which is a review of the recent visit of Xu Caihou, Vice-Chairman of China's Central Military Commission, to the US, has expressed satisfaction over the developing military-military ties with the US and says:" In the post-cold war era, China has put an end to its ideological restrictions and striven to develop its cooperative ties with countries the world over on the basis of mutual respect and mutual benefit; China has earnestly learned from all advanced things from the U.S. with an open approach instead of following the beaten track of taking the nation as its "sworn foe". Objectively speaking, the achievements China has so far attained contain much sophisticated experience and technologies it has imported from the U.S. In face of the current world beset with crises, any single, individual force is inadequate to cope with crisis. China and the U.S. are important countries in the world, and have unshakable responsibilities for global peace and security. Both nations should deem it their own duty or responsibility for the promotion of permanent peace and security for humanity; both should discard the cold war mentality, act in line with new principles of equality, respect and cooperation, seek the common ground while reserving their differences, reduce suspicion, and increase the mutual confidence, so as to build up a Sino-U.S. strategic partnership in the 21st century and work together to meet stark challenges facing the humanity. This could bring happiness to their people and to the people around worldwide as well."

10. These articles relating to India and the US bring out the dual Chinese policy of tactical firmness and strategic flexibility. This consists of tactical assertion of what they look upon as China's core interests while not allowing such assertions to affect their strategic relationships with the two countries. (8-11-09)

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

ANNEXURE

China, India expected to forge common prosperity and development

"People's Daily" commentary of November 4, 2009

During the talks in the resort city of Hua Hin, Thailand, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and his Indian counterpart Manmohan Singh agreed that the two countries should forge a strategic partnership to maintain regional peace and stability, achieve the goal of common development and harmonious prosperity. On the disputed border issues, the two sides agreed to narrow the differences through dialogue on the political principles already reached, and jointly work out a solution that goes in line with the interests of both sides. The two sides also need to ensure peace and create a friendly environment in border areas, as well as enhance cooperation and bilateral ties in various aspects.

The consensus between Premier Wen and Indian PM Singh is just like a gentle breeze, clearing up all the suspicion and misunderstanding that have hindered bilateral relations over the past decades. Sino-Indian relations are steadily on the rise despite the ups and downs over the past decades. Leaders from both countries reached agreement that China and India would never regard each other as a threat, which served as a political foundation for the development of bilateral ties from strategic perspective.

Economic and trade cooperation between China and India witnessed robust growth, with bilateral trade volume standing at 51.8 billion U.S. dollars in 2008. India is among China's top ten largest trading partners, and China is India's largest trading partner. Two-way investment also experienced fast growth.

In military cooperation, the military from both countries conducted exchange visits and maintained regular communications, and signed memorandum of understanding on defense exchange and cooperation, putting forward the idea of regular, long-term and large-scale cooperation in terms of training, anti-terrorism as well as joint research-and-rescue operations.

The two Asian neighbors also expanded cooperation in the fields of social exchange, culture and education. In international affairs, China and India have made unrelenting efforts in tackling global economic downturn, climate change, energy security, food security, anti-piracy and anti-terrorism operations.

Generally speaking, Sino-Indian relations witnessed smooth development over the past decades, but some pending issues and unnecessary misunderstanding have plagued bilateral ties. It is of vital importance to combat various pressures and challenges through collaboration. Media from both countries should play a constructive role, creating a healthy environment to facilitate public opinion.

China and India, the two neighbors with the world's largest population, are forging ahead towards peace and development, which is the common wish of both leaders and people.

THE FORT HOOD INCIDENT IN THE US

B.RAMAN

The dilemma and the problems posed by the existence of pockets of qualms of conscience and divided loyalties in the Muslim communities of the non-Muslim world has been tragically illustrated by an incident in a US military base in Fort Hood, Texas, on November 6,2009.Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a psychiatrist of the US Army born to Palestinian migrants to the US from Jordan, suddenly went on a killing spree killing 13 soldiers with a handgun before he was injured and overpowered. He is presently under interrogation.

2.It has been reported that the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has been sought in the investigation to rule out any terrorist conspiracy behind the incident. The indications till now are that it was the act of a lone Muslim with a mind troubled by conflicting loyalties to the US and Islam and angered by his own allegedly negative experiences as a Muslim in the US as well as in the Army and by the US involvement in the campaign against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Iraq and Afghanistan, which is constantly and mischievously projected by Al Qaeda and its affiliates as a campaign against Islam. Media reports claim that over a period of time this officer, with a 20 year record of service in the Army, had been expressing ideas of solidarity with his fellow-religionists, who had taken to arms against the US. He had also come to notice for allegedly speaking with some understanding of what he saw as the compulsions which drove some Muslims to take to suicide terrorism.

3.This was not the first incident of its kind in the US Armed Forces since 9/11, but this was the most dramatic. There were two previous incidents, which were equally troubling, but less dramatic.Just before the US troops entered Iraq in March,2003, Sergeant Hasan Akbar of the US Army based in Kuwait threw hand-grenades and opened fire into a tent in which US military personnel were sleeping. Two officers were killed.There was another incident in which two soldiers were killed outside a recruitment centre in Little Rock, Arkansas.

4. The fact that such incidents have till now been few and far between show that the US military authorities are sensitive to the pressures that are likely to be faced by the Muslim soldiers of their Armed Forces arising from the propaganda that the US military is waging a campaign against Islam and not against Al Qaeda, the Taliban and other terrorist groups and that efforts are being made to remove wrong impressions of the campaign against terrorism in the minds of the Muslim soldiers, whose number in the US Armed Forces is estimated at around 3600.

5.The Fort Hood incident shows that despite this, troubled minds continue to exist among the Muslim soldiers. There has been an obvious failure of the human element in that despite past reports of the negative thinking and ideas of Major Hasan timely action was not taken to facilitate his exit from the Army in response to his reported desire to leave the Army.

6. Those opposed to the US role in Iraq and Afghanistan would use the Fort Hood incident as one more reason why the US should quit Iraq and Afghanistan. Isolated incidents such as this should not be allowed to influence policy decisions of strategic significance.

7. As of now, there is no evidence that a terrorist conspiracy might have been behind the incident. But it is likely that Al Qaeda and its affiliates would exploit it to spread disaffection and anger among the Muslim soldiers just as in the 1980s, the Afghan Mujahideen spread disaffection and anger among the Muslim soldiers from Chechnya, Dagestan and Central Asia serving in the Soviet Army. They went on duty to Afghanistan as convinced communists, but returned as born-again and wahabised Muslims. They constituted the initial core of the terrorist movements in Chechnya, Dagestan and the present-day Central Asian Republics. A similar possibility in the US has to be guarded against. ( 7-11-09 )

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute for Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

MUMBAI 26/11 : A DAY OF INFAMY

May like to see http://news.rediff.com/special/2009/nov/05/local-involvement-in-2611-needs-attention-says-b-raman.htm

26/11 : HEIGHTENED ALERT

INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR: PAPER NO.572

B.RAMAN

As the first anniversary of the 26/11 terrorist strike by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in Mumbai approaches, there is a heightened alert by the secuity agencies to prevent any major terrorist strike coinciding with the anniversary by the LET itself or by other Pakistani and/or Indian organisations such as the Indian Mujahideen (IM) or the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) . The terrorists would be calculating that a successful strike around the anniversary would damage the credibility of the Indian State in the eyes of its own people and the international community and strengthen their support base.

2. While it is primarily the responsibility of the State's security agencies to thwart in time any fresh conspiracy by the terrorists, the public will have a useful role to play by sharing with the agencies any information or suspicious activity coming to its notice. The state agencies should create an awareness of the kind of role the public can play and as to how to convey any information or suspicions to the State agencies. Successful counter-terrorism depends on effective State-public co-operation.

3. We have not had any terrorist strike by the IM and SIMI for 14 months now and by the LET and other Pakistani organisations in the Indian territory outside Jammu & Kashmir for almost 12 months now. The credit for this should go to our intelligence and physical security agencies and the police. It is not that fresh conspiracies were not being hatched in Indian and Pakistani territories. They were, but these were thwarted by the success of the intelligence agencies and the police in identifying and neutralising the cells which might have played a role in the execution of these conspiracies.

4.The recent arrests of two persons resident in Chicago by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on a charge of trying to assist the LET and Ilyas Kashmiri, a former officer of Pakistan's Special Services Group (SSG), who has emerged as another Khalid Sheikh Mohammad (KSM), in carrying out a terrorist strike in Denmark and a repeat of 26/11 in India show that the conspiracies are not confined to the sub-continent. They extend to Europe and North America where there is a large diaspora of migrants from Pakistan and the rest of the Islamic world and some local converts to Islam, who are prepared to assist Al Qaeda, the LET and their associates in carrying out their plans.

5.Even in 2003, the LET had wanted to mount a terrorist strike in India by using recruits in the US, but its plans were detected and foiled in time by the FBI. India has reasons to be thankful to the US agencies for their alertness and for their co-operation in preventing fresh strikes. Strengthened, active and discreet Indo-US co-operation in counter-terrorism has been a significant post-26/11 feature. The US may be still reluctant to act against the Government of Pakistan for continuing to use terrorism against India, but it has given indications of its determination to help India in preventing a repeat of 26/11 in whatever way it can. The strong technical capability of the US agencies and the ground capability of the Indian agencies for human intelligence should help in the efforts to prevent a repeat of 26/11.

6.In counter-terrorism, it is important to avoid over-confidence and self-complacency. Any planning should factor into it the possibility that despite all the precautions and enhanced vigilance by the intelligence agencies, some terrorist conspiracies may still escape detection by the intelligence agencies. As the post 9/11 cliches goes, in counter-terrorism the agencies know what they know, but they don't know what they don't know.

7. While the agencies will be making every effort to reduce the zone of "what they don't know", it will not be possible to eliminate it altogethrer. That is where the importance of vulnerability perceptions and reviews comes in. Vulnerability perceptions help in denying success to the terrorists even if one doesn't detect in time terrorist conspiracies. Capacity-building, physical security and alertness play an important role in this. The foiled attacks on the Indian Parliament House in December,2001, and on Ahmedabad's Akshardam temple in September 2002 are good examples of how success can be denied to terrorists through effective physical security based on vulnerability perceptions.

8. Physical security reviews based on vulnerability perceptions have to be an on-going process. Vulnerability identification and follow-up action to plug gaps in physical security become a difficult exercise in India because of its large size and the hundreds of potentially soft targets available in our metro cities. Despite this, a constantly updated vulnerability map is a must to prevent a repeat of 26/11.

9.A continuous modus operandi (MO) review is as important as a vulnerability review. The terrorists oprerating in the Af-Pak region keep changing the MO to make their terrorist strikes more lethal and to take the security agencies by surprise. The MO used by them after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 is a mix of the old and the new----use of hand-held weapons and improvised explosive devices, commando-style attacks, simultaneous or orchestrated attacks of a complex nature on multiple targets, suicidal (fedayeen) and suicide attacks and so on. The training and re-training of our security agencies and police must enable them to meet the changing MO of the terrorists.

10. IEDs did not play as important a role in the 26/11 terrorist strikes as they did in the July,2006, terrorist attacks on Mumbai suburban trains.Of course, the IM and the SIMI relied largely on IEDs, but the Pakistani associates of Al Qaeda were using more and more complex commando-style attacks with hand-held weapons, the most spectacular of which were the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore earlier this year and the recent attack on the General Headquarters of the Pakistan Army at Rawalpindi. Some of the terrorist attacks in the Af-Pak region after the GHQ attack show that the terrorists are shifting once again to vehicular bombs involving large quantities of explosives. These attacks show the continuing availability of large quantities of explosives to the terrorists operating in the sub-continent.

11.While the Indian and US security agencies have a welcome record of increasing successes in detecting and neutralising terrorist cells before they can go into action, they have had little success in detecting and neutralising potential sources of supply of explosive material. This is a weak point in our counter-terrorism capability which needs the individual and joint attention of the Indian and US agencies.

12. Pre-conceived ideas and facile assumptions have no place in counter-terrorism such as the following---- the next attack may also come from the sea, the potential targets mentioned by terrorists under interrogation such as the National Defence College reportedly mentioned by the two Chicago suspects may be the real targets etc. Al Qaeda, the LET and their associates train their recruits and volunteers in ways of misleading the security agencies and the police when caught.

13.These are some of the points needing attention as we strengthen our alertness on the eve of the 26/11 anniversary. It is important for the Government to set in place a scenario-anticipation group to evaluate continuously the likely scenarios to improve our preparedness. ( 5-11-09)

( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute for Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )

MUMBAI 26/11: A DAY OF INFAMY

May like to see http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/nov/02/b-raman-takes-a-look-at-2611.htm