Among the numerous viewpoints regarding India’s potential to make it to the big league, one of the most important opinions held by many analysts is that India has even failed to decisively counter the challenge of terrorism directed towards it from its neighbour, which is one-eighth its size.

Experts opine that the defeat and humiliation at the hands of the Chinese in 1962 has been largely overlooked in the planning of future strategies. According to them, there is a lot of hype about India’s emergence as a great power. But as we take credit for limited successes against a small adversary, there is little or no public knowledge of a well laid out doctrine regarding future engagement with a superior power like China.

On July 2, 1999 Sharif called President Clinton and requested him to intervene. The President also consulted with then Indian Prime Minister A B Vajpayee who clearly stated that India will not negotiate “under the threat of aggression” and that withdrawal of Pakistani forces was essential.

Sharif again called President Clinton on July 3 and told him that he was ready to come to Washington. The President warned him that without agreeing to withdraw Pakistani forces behind the LoC, the visit will not yield any results. Sharif told him that he was coming to the US on July 4.

An intelligence report by India’s Intelligence Bureau in December 2006 states that ISI, in cooperation with Pakistan Navy, is imparting navigational training to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorists.

The report further states that the training is for 12 to 18 months and is divided into three phases. The first phase deals with learning swimming. The second phase of the training involved tasks like handling large boats, laying of mines in coastal zones, and planting of explosives under dams, bridges, and ships among others.

Over the past two months, none of us has remained insulated from the public discourse that has ranged from faint-hearted defeatism accepting a rotting order to boisterous and repetitive calls seeking “action” and “change.”

These words, however, are deceptive devices; they invoke the images of a euphoric, bright destiny but fail to vanquish the darkness along the road that has to be endured.

When Mrs Indira Gandhi again became Prime Minister in 1980, she recalled Kao from his retirement and appointed him as her senior advisor on internal and external developments. She used to consult him on political and intelligence matters. His professional guidance was of general nature.

In one major development, when Mrs Gandhi wanted to go USA she was not getting her choice of appointment date with the US President through External Affairs Ministry channels. Kao through his friend George Bush Senior – who was then US Ambassador in China – arranged her meeting with the US President.

The issue is not of empowering the police. It is of having a police which looks up to the laws of the land and the Constitution of the country in the discharge of its functions. The harsh truth is that the police today is more concerned with carrying out the diktat of the executive, right or wrong, legal or illegal rather than protecting the life and property of the common man.

There are a number of other administrative measures which would need to be taken to give greater muscle to the police. We are heavily under-policed.

India, hit by yet another terror attack in Mumbai, should take Richelieu’s words seriously and act now. I am not suggesting that we should go and bomb Pakistan. We have concrete evidence of the involvement of Pakistan-based terror organisations and the rogue Inter-Services Intelligence. This gives us to right to take actions necessary to safeguard our nation and our way of life.

We know the terror organisations (LeT, JeM) waging a war against our country, the people who are supporting them (Dawood and his gang) and their locations. The first thing our government has to do is to immediately revive the covert action unit of the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), which was closed down by then Prime Minister Inder Kumar Gujral in 1997.