Three years after 26/11, we’re still waiting for a closure

It’s been three years since vile, jihad-indoctrinated men from a benighted jihad-indoctrinated nation sneaked into Mumbai and waged urban war on India’s most vibrant city. Since then, countless tears have been shed, and much time and energy has been expended in applying balm to India’s bruised soul. Yet, we’ve still not been able to bring a closure to those dark days of terrorist hell. Many reasons account for why 26/11 is a wound that still weeps. And, no, it’s not just about the fact that the sole surviving terrorist – Ajmal Kasab – still sits on death row, making a mockery of the provisions of Indian jurisprudence that were intended to ensure a fair trial. [caption id=“attachment_111236” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Mumbai nurses a forever weeping wound. AFP[/caption] The fact that a gunman who was, quite improbably, caught on closed circuit television cameras while dealing in death is savouring the hospitality of the Indian state at considerable expense must surely rankle with many of the families of 26/11 victims. But it isn’t just some primitive bloodlust that underlies the body of public sentiment seeking Kasab’s death – after, it bears reiterating, a due process of trial. It is rather more about the willingness of the Indian state, which is justifiably perceived as being overly soft, to signal its earnestness in bringing a closure to that November nightmare. Any way you look at it, the 26/11 attack was a proxy war waged by Pakistan, and for all its denials and two-faced conduct since then, even Pakistan has forsaken its pawn, and today acknowledges the merit of hanging Kasab. So, yes, Kasab’s trial and the rendering of justice is an important part of reconciliation, but there’s also more to that process. For one thing, it’s fair to say that Mumbai – and, for that matter, India – isn’t any safer from terror attacks since 26/11. Sure, we haven’t seen an attack as spectacular as that, and many terror plots have perhaps been pre-empted through better intelligence (or sheer luck), but for all the thunderous speeches we’ve heard since then, we haven’t exactly secured ourselves in any convincing fashion. With every terrorist attack since then, Mumbai, and the rest of India, has shown admirable fortitude and resolve to never let it happen again. Yet, we know with near-certainty that the prospect of its happening again is very real. True, there’s no merit in living in mortal fear of another attack, but we don’t even have the consolation of knowing that we’re doing the barest minimum to keep our cities safe. Three years after 26/11, Pakistan’s role in sponsoring jihadi terror - in India and elsewhere – is stark enough for the wider world not to look away from. Yet, for all the rhetoric about improving bilateral relations, there isn’t a perceptible change in the mindset of Pakistani state, and principally its ISI-military complex, in its use of jihadi forces to wage proxy war on India. To this day, Pakistan continues to evade responsibility for bringing the real perpetrators of 26/11 to trial. India’s coercive diplomacy vis-à-vis Pakistan over the past three years has seen some positive results. Yet, rushing headlong into a peacenik initiative – in the absence of any indication that the real power behind the Pakistani throne is on board - is folly. Peace is certainly desirable, but trying to secure peace at any cost, particularly when the sentiment isn’t reciprocated, is dangerous. That’s exactly the wrong way to bring a closure to 26/11.