MEA review raises red flag after botched Paris plot
Scary as it sounds, India's diplomatic missions
in many countries, especially those in our neighbourhood, are sitting
ducks for terror attacks because the security arrangements of the host
nations are far from satisfactory.
So worrying is the situation that the Indian government has been forced to intervene and direct all its missions abroad to work closely with the host countries and their security agencies to ensure the safety of the diplomatic installations.
It was an aborted terror attack on the Indian embassy in France earlier this year that prompted the government to undertake an unprecedented review of the security at 162 Indian missions and posts abroad, leading to the alarming conclusion that the country's diplomatic staff faced a serious threat in many countries.
Corrective measures have been taken up and it is understood that external affairs ministry officials have visited various embassies and high commissions to review security preparedness and hold deliberations with the local authorities.
Sources pointed out that the Indian mission, which were already in regular touch with the foreign ministries and security agencies of the host countries, have stepped up their cooperation to safeguard the embassies. This includes sharing of information on threat perception and activities of terror modules on a real time basis as Pakistan-based terror networks expand their reach to new areas.
In July 2008, the Indian embassy in Kabul was the target of a suicide attack in which 58 people, including an Indian Foreign Service officer were killed. In another suicide blast at the embassy in Afghanistan in October 2009, 17 people were killed. The Taliban was behind the attacks in which Pakistan's ISI is also believed to have played a role.
The aborted attack in Paris underlines the chilling truth that India's embassies and consulates in other countries, including European nations, too are now on the radar of the Taliban, al-Qaeda and other terror outfits.
Mohamed Merah, who killed seven people, including three children at a Jewish school, and was later shot dead by the French special forces in Toulouse on March 22, had also planned to attack the Indian embassy in Paris. According to the French Central Directorate of Internal Intelligence and the special forces, Merah's Taliban handlers in Pakistan had ordered him in 2011 to target the Indian mission. Reports said Merah dropped the idea given the difficulty of the enterprise, underscoring the fact that an efficient intelligence and security apparatus could thwart a possible attack.
Sources indicated that India was satisfied with the French approach to secure its embassy and diplomats. The security infrastructure in other developed nations in Europe, the US, Canada, Australia, Russia and Gulf countries, too, has given the country much confidence. But in many other countries in South Asia, particularly in the volatile Afghanistan-Pakistan, the country's diplomatic establishment faces serious threat.
Former Intelligence Bureau (IB) chief Ajit Doval pointed out that physical security of diplomatic missions was the responsibility of the host country. "The French security system is quite robust which enabled it to thwart the terror attack. Besides physical security, intelligence agencies also need to penetrate terror cells to foil plans. Indian intelligence agencies need to collaborate with their counterparts and share information to prevent attacks on its missions," he said.
Former Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) chief A.S. Dulat said: "The threat perception has increased worldwide post 9/11. It is important for any Indian mission to identify where and who the threat is from. This is the key to safeguarding the diplomatic installations."
Security preparedness at Indian missions has been put under three categories. Those in developed countries like the US, France, the UK, Russia, Australia and Gulf nations get effective safety cover due to the robust security system of the host country.
But the quality of the security apparatus in neighbouring Nepal, Pakistan and Afghanistan is not satisfactory. "This increases the vulnerability of the missions there. We do not take any chances and chalk out our plans of protecting the missions," an informed source said. The Indian missions have to make their own arrangements by remaining on high alert and gathering real time information by sharing inputs with the headquarters and security agencies in India.
Diplomatic missions in West Asia, such as in volatile Syria, have been asked to be on alert and chalk out contingency plans to shift to neighbouring Lebanon or Jordan if the situation worsens.
The Bureau of Security (BOS) in the external affairs ministry, comprising officials drawn from the home ministry and the IB, makes the security assessment of diplomatic missions worldwide. Key Indian diplomatic missions in the US, the UK, Russia and neighbours such as Nepal, Bangladesh, and Pakistan each have an officer from the BOS who is the charge of overall security of the respective embassies. BOS representatives posted abroad coordinate with security and intelligence agencies of the host countries.
Strategic affairs expert Sushant Sareen feels that the Indian mission in Pakistan faces a threat because terror activities against India are sponsored by the state. In many countries, the security infrastructure of the host countries is incapable of providing the required protection while in some cases, safety is compromised because of hostile ties.
"Certain Indian missions in South Asia and China have an intrusive security infrastructure due to the hostility that exists there. Western countries have a system in place that can detect a threat in advance. Besides, they do not sponsor terror against India. There are terror cells in these (other) countries and it is essential for the local security to penetrate these cells to thwart any threat," said Sareen.
According to noted security expert Ajai Sahni, diplomatic missions in South Asia are vulnerable due to the porous borders across the region and because "the supply line of terrorists from Pakistan" is too close to Nepal, Afghanistan and Bangladesh.
"This increases the vulnerability of the Indian missions there. While the local security agencies assure the Indian embassies of providing elaborate security, we do not take any chances and chalking out our plans of protecting the missions," an informed source said.
Source: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/mea-review-raises-red-flag-after-botched-paris-plot/1/202140.html
So worrying is the situation that the Indian government has been forced to intervene and direct all its missions abroad to work closely with the host countries and their security agencies to ensure the safety of the diplomatic installations.
It was an aborted terror attack on the Indian embassy in France earlier this year that prompted the government to undertake an unprecedented review of the security at 162 Indian missions and posts abroad, leading to the alarming conclusion that the country's diplomatic staff faced a serious threat in many countries.
Corrective measures have been taken up and it is understood that external affairs ministry officials have visited various embassies and high commissions to review security preparedness and hold deliberations with the local authorities.
Sources pointed out that the Indian mission, which were already in regular touch with the foreign ministries and security agencies of the host countries, have stepped up their cooperation to safeguard the embassies. This includes sharing of information on threat perception and activities of terror modules on a real time basis as Pakistan-based terror networks expand their reach to new areas.
In July 2008, the Indian embassy in Kabul was the target of a suicide attack in which 58 people, including an Indian Foreign Service officer were killed. In another suicide blast at the embassy in Afghanistan in October 2009, 17 people were killed. The Taliban was behind the attacks in which Pakistan's ISI is also believed to have played a role.
The aborted attack in Paris underlines the chilling truth that India's embassies and consulates in other countries, including European nations, too are now on the radar of the Taliban, al-Qaeda and other terror outfits.
Mohamed Merah, who killed seven people, including three children at a Jewish school, and was later shot dead by the French special forces in Toulouse on March 22, had also planned to attack the Indian embassy in Paris. According to the French Central Directorate of Internal Intelligence and the special forces, Merah's Taliban handlers in Pakistan had ordered him in 2011 to target the Indian mission. Reports said Merah dropped the idea given the difficulty of the enterprise, underscoring the fact that an efficient intelligence and security apparatus could thwart a possible attack.
Sources indicated that India was satisfied with the French approach to secure its embassy and diplomats. The security infrastructure in other developed nations in Europe, the US, Canada, Australia, Russia and Gulf countries, too, has given the country much confidence. But in many other countries in South Asia, particularly in the volatile Afghanistan-Pakistan, the country's diplomatic establishment faces serious threat.
Former Intelligence Bureau (IB) chief Ajit Doval pointed out that physical security of diplomatic missions was the responsibility of the host country. "The French security system is quite robust which enabled it to thwart the terror attack. Besides physical security, intelligence agencies also need to penetrate terror cells to foil plans. Indian intelligence agencies need to collaborate with their counterparts and share information to prevent attacks on its missions," he said.
Former Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) chief A.S. Dulat said: "The threat perception has increased worldwide post 9/11. It is important for any Indian mission to identify where and who the threat is from. This is the key to safeguarding the diplomatic installations."
Security preparedness at Indian missions has been put under three categories. Those in developed countries like the US, France, the UK, Russia, Australia and Gulf nations get effective safety cover due to the robust security system of the host country.
But the quality of the security apparatus in neighbouring Nepal, Pakistan and Afghanistan is not satisfactory. "This increases the vulnerability of the missions there. We do not take any chances and chalk out our plans of protecting the missions," an informed source said. The Indian missions have to make their own arrangements by remaining on high alert and gathering real time information by sharing inputs with the headquarters and security agencies in India.
Diplomatic missions in West Asia, such as in volatile Syria, have been asked to be on alert and chalk out contingency plans to shift to neighbouring Lebanon or Jordan if the situation worsens.
The Bureau of Security (BOS) in the external affairs ministry, comprising officials drawn from the home ministry and the IB, makes the security assessment of diplomatic missions worldwide. Key Indian diplomatic missions in the US, the UK, Russia and neighbours such as Nepal, Bangladesh, and Pakistan each have an officer from the BOS who is the charge of overall security of the respective embassies. BOS representatives posted abroad coordinate with security and intelligence agencies of the host countries.
Strategic affairs expert Sushant Sareen feels that the Indian mission in Pakistan faces a threat because terror activities against India are sponsored by the state. In many countries, the security infrastructure of the host countries is incapable of providing the required protection while in some cases, safety is compromised because of hostile ties.
"Certain Indian missions in South Asia and China have an intrusive security infrastructure due to the hostility that exists there. Western countries have a system in place that can detect a threat in advance. Besides, they do not sponsor terror against India. There are terror cells in these (other) countries and it is essential for the local security to penetrate these cells to thwart any threat," said Sareen.
According to noted security expert Ajai Sahni, diplomatic missions in South Asia are vulnerable due to the porous borders across the region and because "the supply line of terrorists from Pakistan" is too close to Nepal, Afghanistan and Bangladesh.
"This increases the vulnerability of the Indian missions there. While the local security agencies assure the Indian embassies of providing elaborate security, we do not take any chances and chalking out our plans of protecting the missions," an informed source said.
Source: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/mea-review-raises-red-flag-after-botched-paris-plot/1/202140.html
Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/mea-review-raises-red-flag-after-botched-paris-plot/1/202140.html
Source: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/mea-review-raises-red-flag-after-botched-paris-plot/1/202140.html
Comments