In its annual report, Patterns of Global Terrorism: 1992, published at the end of April 1993, the U.S. State Department had stated that in 1992 the number of international terrorist incidents had fallen to a seventeen-year low. The academia and the defence analysts went out of their way to welcome the statistics, the former to predict that the worst about the menace of terrorism was over and the encouraging trend would continue, the latter to promote their line to dismantle the state structures that promote order and counter violence. A feeling of déjà vu set in. The warning of bombing attack on the World Trade Center in February 1993 was ignored by the Americans. So were many other incidents and plots uncovered to demonstrate that the terrorists were lying low to recoup, train and learn. The respite was short lived; 9/11 shattered the naiveté borne by statistics.

Precisely this is the post cease-fire mood in India, more so in the hierarchies that champion the war against terror and want India to be part of the global alliance. It is hardly the time to tell off the well-wishers when the prevailing wisdom is moderation and peace at all cost. It mirrors the legacy psyche; propensity to let bygones be bygones, proclivity of whipping up and whining down friendship hysteria, and switching on and switching off patriotism. The cease-fire bodes well for the peace, but the proclivity to cease-vigilance bodes ill. It is the most appropriate time to reflect on the threats that would emerge again and responses that we would be called to marshal.

 The post-Kargil era has added conflictual tenor to a panoply of long-standing issues, of which Kashmir is but one. It will be prudent to work out terms of political engagement on each one of them. Casus belli in the past has not been confined to the “K” factor alone as Khushwant Singh terms the Pak obsession. If there is one then it lies in the two-nation theory and lately the specious Huntington thesis of the inevitability of “Clash of Civilizations”.

 We in India suffer from “over there” syndrome, more than others do. It is time we identified ourselves with counter-terrorism in the global arena. There are valuable lessons to draw from the Iraqi, Turkish, Palestinian and Chechnyan experience both on the nature of warfare, and the kind of world disorder which may emerge should the balance go in favour of the terrorists. We have another cause to worry. The US still considers Pakistan as part of the solution, whereas for us it certainly is a part of the problem. We have to persevere till there is meeting of minds. India may benefit from the reduction in tension and easing up of eyeball confrontation of the Parakram days, but to forget history and altogether distance ourselves from the trying years would be inopportune. We need to gain a sense of perspective on the present not forgetting the past. Events have demonstrated that academic research on terrorism is flawed and never contributed to such understanding. If we utilize the present wisely, to learn from experience, we might better prepare ourselves for the next time proxy terrorism challenges the security and integrity of India.

 What then should be our security agenda? It can be best summed up in one word, agyalwas (living incognito) for the security forces, the Army in particular. They should be in the Valley but not seen, though seemingly, that is without fanfaring their presence. Lord Krishna visited the Pandavas only once during their exile, and that was in the thirteenth year of their agyatwas, scrupulously refraining from doing so earlier. When Bhim gave vent to Pandavas’ woes and soldierly frustration of not being able to teach Kauravas a lesson, the Lord advised him patience and refrain from indulging in rage and publicizing antagonism, as that would compromise the mission and the intent. He set the agenda unambiguously to gather intelligence and prepare for the worst, should the Kauravas not honour the commitments after Pandavas had kept their part of the bargain.

  This then is the agenda for the Mission Fateh; re-assess, regroup, re-enthuse and rejuvenate. Neither the fight against terrorism has ended nor are there signs of Pakistani proxy war heading towards denouement. Ceasefire is a mere interregnum for terror mongers. They would abuse it, violate it and blame the security forces. We continue to confront sly-boots and it would be to our peril to draw any slapdash conclusions from their sweet talk. Whoever heard of a flesh-eating feline changing the colour of its coat or stripes, but a chameleon does. Pakistan would continue to fuel proxy terrorism. In short, the current overtures and ceasefire are not trend irreversible.