Who Was Responsible For The Mumbai Terror Attacks ?  

The Mumbai terrorist attacks have dominated the media in recent days, so I feel bound to throw in a few links on the topic.

As the mainstream press is busy parading security experts telling us it is yet more Islamic terrorism I won't repeat what you've read plenty of times elsewhere, but instead head straight for the fringes.

Larvatus Prodeo is wondering if the media is being too hasty in automatically laying the blame at the feet of Islamic militants wanting to strike at the West, noting that Hindu radicals have caused plenty of havoc in the country as well and it could also be viewed as a continuation of internal strife - Mumbai terror attacks: an anti-Hindutva motivation?.

The Mumbai terror attacks are horrendous and to be roundly and loudly condemned. But, as with all events of this nature (particularly those which involve attacks on Westerners), inevitably there’s been a rush to inscribe their significance within a political frame - the prime candidate being the war on terror. Andrew Bolt can stand as representative here:

THE slaughter in Mumbai was a barbaric attack not just on India, but on us. On the West.

Now, I don’t think that the reflex response to the desire to prematurely ascribe blame to Al-Qaeda before the facts are known should be to rush off in the opposite direction. But it did interest me that many of the television reports a few nights ago sought commentary from experts in terror studies, rather than sourcing those who have a deep knowledge of Indian and subcontinental politics and history per se. This in itself ties in with the desire to write one single narrative of international terrorism, as the terrorism experts in question are usually best informed about Middle Eastern and South East Asian affairs. This in turn both ascribes more unity to international terror networks than actually exists, and turns them into an immediate and default suspected cause, no matter what the specificities of the political and social environment in which attacks actually occur.

Anyone with anything more than a passing acquaintance with Indian politics, society and history, though, would know that it’s quite possible, even probable, that the attacks’ causes lie in factors such as the increasingly weak Indian central government’s inability to control its territory and monopolise the use of violence, and the inability of either the justice system or the state (even after the Congress-led coalition defeated the BJP) to prevent inter-communal violence and massacres such as those in Gujarat in 2002 or hold anyone to account for them. Political violence in India recently, it’s also worthy of note, has often been directed as much against Christians as Muslims, and what we may be seeing is the emergence of what are basically pogroms on a much bigger and more organised scale. The role of the Shiv Sena Party in the governance of Mumbai itself, a party which has called for the formation of Hindutva suicide squads and an ethno-religious sectarian neighbourhood cleansing program in the city, may additionally be a factor.

One shouldn’t rush to judgement. And one shouldn’t do that also for reasons of preserving an awareness of the horror of the deaths and injuries that have been inflicted in Mumbai and some more respect and dignity for the victims than instantly transforming them into political footballs. But if causes are to be sought, and they should be, both the Pakistani connections to violence and the emergence of terrorist movements pushing back against the nationalist pogroms may well be found in time - after the facts are in - to have been at work in these tragic events.

As usual, the tinfoil world is pretty cynical about "India's 9/11", with Cryptogon outlining the usual "who benefits" line of reasoning - India: Coordinated Terrorist Attacks.

See, this is why the U.S. needs to attack Pakistan… *wink* *wink* Get it?

Of course, it’s possible that this is some sort of organic insurgency. (Anything is possible, right?) I doubt it, though, because no critical economic infrastructure was hit. When the attackers start popping Internet and electrical infrastructure, shutting down the operations of transnational corporations, then the CIA and its clients might not be behind it.

I’ve read several accounts of what happened, and it’s just absurd, from a military perspective. If the coordinators of this outrage are not false flag CIA/ISI shills, they’re complete idiots.

As usual, ask yourself, who benefits from this?

Break For News (which I first came across a few years ago when it declared peak oil to be a myth spread by the CIA - and more recently, when it declared Obama a closet communist, prompting some mockery at Rigorous Intuition) has some interesting questions about the Indian counter-terrorism leader who died early on in the violence, suggesting Hindu radicals may be behind this - The Man Who Knew Too Much: Who Killed Indian Anti-Terror Chief ?.

ATS chief Hemant Karkare, two senior police officers and 80 others were killed when terrorists struck with impunity in Mumbai on Wednesday night in coordinated multiple blasts and gunfire in a dozen areas including at iconic landmarks CST railway station and two five star hotels--Oberoi and Taj.

Karkare (54), who was probing the Malegaon blasts case, was gunned down when he was leading an operation at Hotel Taj against terrorists who had taken 15 people, including seven foreigners, as hostages. He was hit by three bullets in his chest.