nouspique.com

With the capture yesterday of the last of the militants who have been wreaking havoc in Mumbai, the focus has shifted to the question of who is behind the attacks. In emails sent to several media outlets, the previously unknown group, the Deccan Muhajideen, has claimed responsibility. Manmohan Singh, India’s Prime Minister, has suggested that this was the result of “external forces,” a euphemism customarily used to describe Pakistan-based militants. Perhaps the best way to identify the perpetrators is to examine the victims, the targets, and Mumbai itself.

Victims

Of the 195 confirmed dead (that number may rise because another 300 were injured), 18 were foreigners including 2 Canadians, 6 Americans, and 1 Briton. The overwhelming majority of the victims were Indian nationals. Reports from the two targeted hotels, the Taj Mahal Palace & Tower and the Trident-Oberoi, suggest that terrorists specifically sought Americans and Britons. This may account for heightened attention in the Western media. When 13 bombs exploded in Mumbai in 1993 killing 250 and injuring another 1100, these events received modest coverage in the West, but in a post 9/11 world, the knee jerk assumption is that terrorists always target Western interests. See for example this report from the Philippines which draws links to al Qaeda. However, the facts indicate that Western concerns were incidental. The greatest carnage was in the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus train station where heavily armed terrorists were able to gun down waiting passengers indiscriminately. Victims there included the chief of the anti-terrorist squad, Hemant Karkare, and 13 other officers.

Targets

There were 10 targets. View this map for some of the locations. Two were the Trident-Oberoi and Taj Mahal Palace & Tower hotels which play host to wealthy Western tourists. The photo at right is taken from the courtyard of the Taj Mahal. Another target was an upscale restaurant, the Leopold Café, where 8 were killed. Terrorists killed six at a Jewish centre, leading to speculation of anti-Semitic motives. Also a target was the Cama and Albless Hospital.

A Telegraph article suggests that, while the attack cannot be attributed to al Qaeda, it uses a page from the al Qaeda playbook. Citing terrorism expert Dr. George Kassimeris, it suggests that the targets weren’t selected for ideological reasons, but in order to create as much havoc as possible and in order to attract as much attention as possible. On this analysis, Westerners weren’t the primary target, but were instrumental in drawing international attention to the region.

Mumbai

Formerly Bombay, this city of 18 million is the financial heart of India, accounting for 40 % of the country’s GNP, with a port that handles half of the country’s foreign trade. It is a city of contrasts. Most obvious is the contrast between wealth and poverty. Western cities are sufficiently sanitized that the very wealthy never have to face the poverty in their midst. But that is one luxury that wealthy Mumbaikers can’t buy. At night, sidewalks are littered with the homeless who sleep shrouded in white. The sheer numbers make this unavoidable. Bollywood beauties gaze down from billboards while illiterate wallah’s do their laundry.

Another contrast that plays close to the surface is the contrast amongst religious traditions. Although predominantly Hindu, because of the syncretistic nature of Hindu belief, it is highly tolerant of other belief systems. A Jewish centre as one of the targets of the attack. One of the Taj Mahal’s chefs, Vijay Rao Banja, who was killed in the attack, was buried at St. Thomas Cathedral, an Anglican church built there in 1718. The Taj Mahal itself, was built in 1904 by a Parsi. One of the prominent features of the Mumbai landscape are the Towers of Silence in the Malabar Hills where the Parsi leave their dead so the bones can be picked clean by vultures. Recently there have been public health concerns because of a dwindling vulture population. Nearby is a Jain Temple, also built in 1904. See the detail of its roof at right. And the Kanheri Caves on the western outskirts of the city evidence a Buddhist presence which dates back to the first century B.C.E. The only religious tradition with an uneasy presence in Mumbai is Islam.

Who

Because the terrorists made no demands and had shot most of their hostages before members of the National Security Guard had arrived, and because the only group to claim responsibility is a previously unknown Islamic group, it is difficult to verify if in fact these acts were the work of Islamic extremists. However, given a long history of conflict over the disputed Kashmiri region, it’s a fair guess to suppose this is related. The 1993 bombings were in retaliation for the 1992 destruction of the 14th-century Babri Masjid temple by Hindu nationalists. Bombings in both 2003 and 2006 were blamed on Kashmiri Islamist groups who are fighting from independence from Indian rule. See this article on the Lashkar-e-Toiba.

Why

It would be simplistic to blame Islamic fundamentalism for these actions. Religious belief may provide a modern gloss, but it may have less to do with explanation than with justification. Perhaps the most notorious rift between Hindus and Moslems came in 1947 with the partition of India. This brought about the single largest migration of people in history with the dislocation of nearly 18 million people of which 3.4 million mysteriously went missing. India’s independence was viewed as a moral victory both for a nation and for its spiritual leader, Mohandas Gandhi, who just happened to be Hindu. However, it also became the occasion of oppression for a Moslem minority which was forced from its land and marched to less desirable ground. While India freed itself from the colonial yoke, it imposed one on another people. What has proceeded from that event is a series of retaliatory incidents so long and complicated that nobody can remember a time without hatred.

There is also a strand of racism here. Even in the 60’s as a young child I remember the racial slurs against Pakis. They were dirty. They were stupid. They were less human. I don’t think such attitudes were unique to my place in Canada; they were everywhere in the West. On the other hand, we viewed India as a noble nation that had followed a living saint to independence. Religion had nothing to do with it. A Paki was a Paki.

I suspect that such a bias persists in the West. Consider George Bush’s statement in response to events in Mumbai: “The killers who struck this week are brutal and violent, but terror will not have the final word. … People of India are resilient. People of India are strong. They have built a vibrant, multiethnic democracy that can withstand this trial. Their financial capital of Mumbai will continue to be the center of commerce and prosperity.” There is, behind this statement, a silent commentary on Pakistan whose place in international affairs has always been shady by comparison.

And so the partition persists. It is lines on a map. But it is also lines of international loyalties. These lines are determined by commitment to a particular brand of democracy and to a particular brand of commerce for which Mumbai stands as India’s shining star.

Still, somewhere in the back of my mind, I can’t help thinking about the forced migration and the loss of 3.4 million people. If it were anyone else, wouldn’t we call that a holocaust? And wouldn’t we say: never again? And wouldn’t we do everything in our power to remember?

I don’t for a minute support the actions of the past week, but I do seek to understand them.

No related posts.