Opinion: Change tack on terrorism

Public-private collaboration can be more effective in tackling terrorist activities regardless of any form or size

By Cris Fernando Anand Perez, Dr Karamala Areesh Kumar

Terrorism has emerged as a major threat to the international community in the contemporary world. In the post-Cold War period, the world witnessed new dimensions of terrorism. However, the international community failed to develop a universally accepted definition for the threat of terrorism, which led to misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the concept. Generally, terrorism was just associated with groups mostly consisting of non-state actors, which adopt violent methods and unlawful use of force, including kidnapping, torturing, hostage and suicide-bombing, against the state. The primary objective of modern terrorist organisations is to destabilise governments and create fear among the common people.

---

Terrorism has become multi-dimensional, including cross-border terrorism, financing networks, propagating ideologies, mass recruitment, cyberattacks, transportation and manufacturing of modern arms and technology. Some of the high-profile activities of terrorism that have targeted India include the Parliament attack (13 December 2001), Jammu & Kashmir Legislative Assembly attack (1 October 2001), Mumbai attacks (26 November 2008), Uri attacks (18 September 2016) and Pulwama attack (14 February 2019). It was only after the Mumbai attacks that India took an intensive initiative to curb terrorism in the South Asian region.

India’s Strategy

To counter terrorism India has adopted a multi-layered counter-strategy. India believes that the solution towards terrorism is through international cooperation and willingness, along with the development of domestic intelligence and policy structuring. The aspects of India to counter terrorism could be grouped into three: normative measures, coercive measures and legal measures.

Firstly, there’s the effort to delegitimise terrorism, which focuses on discrediting terrorist groups and further diminishing their support. India strongly condemns terrorism and opposes any form of support for terrorist organisations. There’s a debate over addressing the root causes of terrorism, where some argue for tackling the underlying grievances that lead to terrorism. While India initially supported this approach emphasising factors like colonialism and foreign occupation, its stance shifted in the 1990s to reject any justification for terrorism, regardless of its cause. India with many other nations advocated for a comprehensive approach, arguing that focusing solely on specific aspects of terrorism is inadequate. It even proposed a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism in 1996.

Secondly, India’s stance on coercive counter-terrorism, involving sanctions and the use of force, makes a firm understanding of the commitment to sovereignty. India considers states as central players in combating terrorism and hesitates to support measures that compromise sovereignty. It opposes the use of force against sovereign states, citing principles like territorial integrity and non-intervention as paramount. Despite this, India supports military action against non-state actors, like in Afghanistan, yet refrains from direct involvement. Regarding sanctions, India often abstains from voting on resolutions targeting sovereign states, criticising the imposition of sanctions as a violation of the last resort principle.

However, India fully implements UN-mandated anti-terrorism sanctions. It advocates for procedural reforms in sanctions regimes to ensure fairness, transparency, and adherence to due process. India has been actively involved in combating terrorism through legal measures. It played a significant role in drafting a resolution in 1987 which addressed state terrorism and advocated for a universally agreed definition of terrorism. India also has co-sponsored various draft resolutions, such as on Afghanistan in 1998 and on human rights and terrorism in 1997.

Not to forget, India sponsored drafts on Measures to Prevent Terrorists from Acquiring Weapons of Mass Destruction (2002) and the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (1996). It is a great initiative in this aspect to have a sense of national security and the ability to respond to terrorism. However, the implementation of the policies and ensuring no sense of corruption within the system will possibly take more effort from both the government and citizens.

Global Initiatives

Regional organisations such as BRICS, BIMSTEC, IORA, SAARC and SCO have collectively emphasised the imperative of combating terrorism and recognising it as a global threat. Initiatives stemming from BRICS, notably the Goa Declaration, underscore the need for comprehensive strategies addressing radicalisation, terrorist financing and the adoption of conventions like the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT). BIMSTEC’s (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation) focus on countering terrorism through the CTTC convention and intensified cooperation underscores its commitment. Similarly, the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), while primarily focused on economic cooperation, acknowledges the security challenges posed by terrorism and engages in relevant discussions.

Despite historical tensions within the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), efforts to combat terrorism remain pertinent, albeit with challenges stemming from political differences. The establishment of the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS) by the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) exemplifies its proactive approach to counter terrorism. However, implementing anti-terrorism initiatives within these organisations faces hurdles, including coordination issues, lack of robust administrative structures, competition with external powers, political differences, diverse national interests and resource constraints. Overcoming these challenges necessitates strategic approaches such as regular dialogues, shared intelligence exchange, capacity-building, harmonising legal frameworks, public awareness campaigns, joint operations, conflict resolution, leveraging economic ties, engaging civil society, academia and sustained political commitment.

Public-Private Partnership

On the other hand, looking into a relatively new approach — public-private partnerships — is crucial in bolstering counterterrorism efforts, as governments collaborate with private entities to harness their expertise, resources and innovation for enhancing security measures. These partnerships contribute significantly in various ways — mainly through information sharing and intelligence collaboration, where private companies provide valuable data and insights, enabling intelligence agencies to access real-time information on potential threats, including data related to suspicious transactions and cyber threats. Technology companies specialise in cybersecurity, aiding in protecting critical infrastructure and preventing cyberattacks.

Finance always plays a vital role. Hence, cooperating with banks and financial institutions will help in tracking illicit financial flows, and strengthening anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing efforts. In resilience planning and crisis management, private firms contribute to disaster preparedness and crisis response, enhancing coordination during emergencies. Finally, in community engagement, private organisations engage with local communities, preventing radicalisation and fostering trust through dialogue and understanding. These multifaceted partnerships highlight the importance of public-private collaboration in the fight against terrorism. India needs to diversify its approach and tactics towards terrorism so it can have more effectiveness at ground levels and be able to predict, target and tackle terrorist activities regardless of any form or size. It also should establish a universal definition of terrorism and unite the international community against terror groups.