“It is the true nature of mankind to learn from mistakes, not from example,” said Fred Hoyle, British astronomer and science fiction author. This wise saying equally applies to security failures, which we learn about from TV screens and internet pages at the times of disasters and terror attacks. Like the one that occurred in India’s Baisaran meadow on April 22, claiming over two dozen lives of civilians.
Nestled in the landscapes of the Jammu and Kashmir region, scenic Baisaran Valley is a popular tourist destination but, as it has turned out, lacked protection on that gruesome day. Five gunmen disguised in military camouflage entered the meadow near the Indian resort town of Pahalgam unhindered. They opened fire, specifically targeting Hindu tourists.
The Pahalgam massacre has rapidly translated into heightened tensions between India and Pakistan after the Islamist group TRF claimed responsibility for the terror attack. According to Indian authorities, the Resistance Front, or TRF, is an offshoot of the Pakistan-based Salafi jihadist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba, the UN-designated terrorist group behind the notorious 2008 Mumbai attacks.
The heavy cost of security lapses
Given the severity of terrorist threats that India faces, any failure of the security apparatus finds itself at the heart of public debate. Alas, there were substantial security and intelligence failures in anticipating and responding to the incident. That was both uncovered by preliminary investigations and acknowledged by Union Home Minister Amit Shah.
In the Pahalgam assault, terrorists were highly selective in their choice of victims, identifying the victims’ religious affiliation before shooting them dead. The whole process took about 20 minutes, with no security personnel being present in the area at the time. Although the terrorists fired more than four dozen rounds from AK-47 rifles – something that was particularly audible in a mountainous area – no immediate response followed.
Furthermore, despite Baisaran Valley being a hot tourist spot, neither the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) was deployed there, nor were any other significant security measures taken. No surveillance cameras, no drones. The nearest CRPF camp was as far as 5 km from the site. Not only did the attackers manage to get to the meadow unnoticed but they could also successfully escape the scene undetected.
The Pahalgam attack has exposed flaws in both security measures and intelligence gathering, triggering discussions on the need to strengthen counterterrorism efforts.
Just days before the tragedy, there were intelligence reports warning about potential terror acts directed against tourists, according to the Jammu and Kashmir police. And yet the information was general in nature, reporting neither the time of the attack nor the possible identities of the perpetrators. The intelligence hinted at the districts of Pulwama and Kulgam, both located in India-administered Jammu and Kashmir, but failed to mention Baisaran.
Meanwhile, it is intelligence that plays a crucial role in counterterrorism, providing information that allows for identifying and thwarting terrorist plots.
Forewarned is forearmed
When it comes to gathering intelligence through technical means, India boasts a comprehensive surveillance infrastructure. This includes the Central Monitoring System (CMS), designed for intercepting phone and Internet messages, and the NETRA software network used by the Intelligence Bureau and the Research and Analysis Wing to identify potential threats through Internet traffic analysis. Furthermore, as part of an ambitious nationwide plan, Indian authorities have set a goal to create a facial recognition system with centralized database – one of the world’s largest.
In the meantime, overreliance on technologies leads to overlooking a time-honored and sometimes indispensable method of collecting information: human intelligence, or HUMINT. One Indian counterterrorism officer, who serves in the Jammu region, has admitted recently that the authorities are now too focused on technical intelligence while neglecting human assets. The failure to gather credible human intelligence may be one of the reasons behind significant casualties among Indian security forces occurring over the last few years in the area.
Steve Hewitt, senior lecturer in American and Canadian studies at the University of Birmingham, has highlighted some benefits of using informants in counterterrorism operations.
“The key advantage over other types of intelligence collection is the ability to gather more precise intelligence through an informant compared with, say, electronic surveillance,” Hewitt told this author. “An informant can ask where and when the attack will occur, for instance. This info may be obtainable through alternative methods, but that may require considerably more resources if, for example, the communications you intercept are encrypted.”
“The other big advantage of informants is that they can disrupt attacks by substituting fake explosives as an example or encouraging an operation where the authorities will be able to curtail it,” he said, adding that there are disadvantages as well. “Informants can be fantasists who tell their handlers what they want to hear, or they can actively encourage more radical paths as agents provocateurs. Or if the group identifies the informant, they can be fed false information to confuse the authorities.”
Failure is the greatest teacher
The Pahalgam attack is not the only security blunder in India’s recent history. In 2019, a convoy of security personnel was attacked in the Pulwama district, resulting in the death of 40 people. The attack happened despite as many as 11 intelligence inputs warning of the looming threat, all of which were ignored.
To be more proactive, India’s security apparatus obviously needs better coordination and intelligence sharing. The deadly four-day Mumbai attacks in 2008, which revealed enormous security lapses, have shown that lessons can be learned.
Just a month after the dramatic incident, India established the National Investigation Agency, or NIA, tasked with addressing terrorism and national security threats. Maritime security has been strengthened, including the launch of the Integrated Coastal Surveillance System (ICSS). Indian authorities have also created the intelligence-sharing network NATGRID that collects data from the country’s security agencies and government bodies.
The Pahalgam attack is a serious challenge for New Delhi. While no nation is immune to terrorism, being easy prey is unacceptable. Indian authorities should remain agile in their approach to terrorist threats and learn fast from past mistakes.