A sharp political divide has stumped the government’s hopes of building a consensus on a National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) – a centralized entity to evaluate and process intelligence on terror threats – with most non-Congress chief ministers rejecting even a diluted version of the body.
States opposed to the NCTC invoked a threat to federalism despite the government agreeing to move NCTC out of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and curtailing its powers to make arrests on the basis of intelligence gathering in suspected cases of terrorism. The political polarized sentiment meant that the NCTC — seen by many as essential for improving India’s response to terrorism — may remain on paper more than four years after the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai shook the nation.
The proposal has been hit by a delay in conceptualization followed by a prolonged stand-off between the Centre and states over NCTC being given the powers to make arrests. All the while India has continued to suffer terror strikes and the need for an agency that institutionalizes intelligence sharing and breaks down inter-agency firewalls is seen to be urgently required.
The mood of Opposition CMs may well mean that the NCTC is put into deep freeze in an election year as non-UPA states made it amply clear that will not accept the agency being imbued with any “operational” power — no matter whether conducted “through” or “in conjunction with state police” as clarified by the Centre.
Interestingly, two Congress CMs — Maharashtra’s Prithviraj Chavan and Karnataka’s Siddaramaiah – also expressed reservations and called for further examination of certain provisions so that the central agency does not encroach upon the states’ domain.
On the other hand, Assam, the third Congressruled state, supported the move, with a caveat saying states should be more engaged in developing intelligence leads and executing operations.
Although all BJP and NDA-ruled states rejected the central anti-terror body, Chhattisgarh presented a different view. CM Raman Singh said the formation of such a body should be ratified by Parliament so that it becomes responsible and answerable to people.
Even though the government may be disappointed with outright rejection of NCTC by most states during the CMs’ conference, sections within the security establishment are happy that the proposed counter-terror agency has died a quiet death for now.
Sources within the intelligence agencies say that a top-heavy approach to security is not the answer to challenges of terrorism and that strengthening of ground forces, state police and local intelligence along with a robust IB would give far better results.
“Over-centralization of security has not worked in any country. It is the ground forces and state police that fight terrorism and insurgency. Their infrastructure and training should be upgraded rather than creating a new agency,” says an IB official.
States opposed to the NCTC invoked a threat to federalism despite the government agreeing to move NCTC out of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and curtailing its powers to make arrests on the basis of intelligence gathering in suspected cases of terrorism. The political polarized sentiment meant that the NCTC — seen by many as essential for improving India’s response to terrorism — may remain on paper more than four years after the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai shook the nation.
The proposal has been hit by a delay in conceptualization followed by a prolonged stand-off between the Centre and states over NCTC being given the powers to make arrests. All the while India has continued to suffer terror strikes and the need for an agency that institutionalizes intelligence sharing and breaks down inter-agency firewalls is seen to be urgently required.
The mood of Opposition CMs may well mean that the NCTC is put into deep freeze in an election year as non-UPA states made it amply clear that will not accept the agency being imbued with any “operational” power — no matter whether conducted “through” or “in conjunction with state police” as clarified by the Centre.
Interestingly, two Congress CMs — Maharashtra’s Prithviraj Chavan and Karnataka’s Siddaramaiah – also expressed reservations and called for further examination of certain provisions so that the central agency does not encroach upon the states’ domain.
On the other hand, Assam, the third Congressruled state, supported the move, with a caveat saying states should be more engaged in developing intelligence leads and executing operations.
Although all BJP and NDA-ruled states rejected the central anti-terror body, Chhattisgarh presented a different view. CM Raman Singh said the formation of such a body should be ratified by Parliament so that it becomes responsible and answerable to people.
Even though the government may be disappointed with outright rejection of NCTC by most states during the CMs’ conference, sections within the security establishment are happy that the proposed counter-terror agency has died a quiet death for now.
Sources within the intelligence agencies say that a top-heavy approach to security is not the answer to challenges of terrorism and that strengthening of ground forces, state police and local intelligence along with a robust IB would give far better results.
“Over-centralization of security has not worked in any country. It is the ground forces and state police that fight terrorism and insurgency. Their infrastructure and training should be upgraded rather than creating a new agency,” says an IB official.
No comments:
Post a Comment