Consequently, a repeat of Mumbai and the panic it engendered within the country is, an exigency that must be considered objectively and this begs the larger question — is the nation’s institutional infrastructure prepared for such an eventuality at this point? It may be recalled that when Mumbai happened and the audio-visual media went ballistic in its incessant coverage of the event, the first few days were very tense. The resilience of the bilateral relationship with Pakistan was sorely tested and for some time the possibility of some rash military initiative from either side was very real. Given the nascent nuclear profile of both nations, the global concern was predictable.

Prudence and rational calculations mandates that when a non-state entity challenges state sovereignty, a nation must not go to war against an opaque adversary without a clear pol-mil assessment about the options available to it. India, to Dr. Singh’s credit, maintained its restraint, and at the time it was averred that if another Mumbai happens, all bets are off. It is precisely this exigency that must be rigorously examined by the Indian security establishment at the political and bureaucratic apex in the interregnum before a new government assumes office in Delhi in late May.

Prevention, pre-emption and contingency planning in relation to cross-border terrorism are not DNA traits that we associate with the Indian security establishment, and the PM conceded as much in his recent media interaction. This was more than visible in the first few hours after the Mumbai attack of November 26. Knee-jerk reactions, lapsing into systemic stasis has become the Indian leitmotif and it is this syndrome that the new Home Minister PC Chidambaram has vowed to alter. In all fairness, he has brought commendable vigour and determination to the job but the clock is against him.

... contd.