 (8).png)
4 days ago
2
ARTICLE AD BOX
Summary
After decades of battling terrorism, India finally has a formal doctrine in Prahaar. It promises swift action and a whole-of-society response, but articulates no stance on whether the state will negotiate with terrorists in hostage situations.
Given India’s extended fight against terrorism, why a policy document on countering it took so long is hard to fathom. With Prahaar, though—an acronym that lays out India’s approach on the menace—we now have a clearly laid out policy.
It advocates swift and proportionate responses to terror threats, the bringing together of government capacities, weakening the conditions enabling radicalization and pursuing a whole-of-society approach to ensure resilience, among other measures.
The broad policy aim is to weaken the terror threat, including by denying terrorists and their financiers access to funds and weapons. Such a doctrine is welcome and should provide the country a policy framework to act within. Ad hoc efforts can be controversial.
This is why it is disappointing that the document articulates no stance on negotiations with terrorists. In hostage situations, decision-makers could find themselves in a no-win position without a publicly stated policy of not making deals at gunpoint.
Our experience with the Kandahar hijacking case of 1999 is an example of the trouble that could arise without such clarity. Prahaar is a good start, but could do with some detailing.
English (US) ·