Anna Hazare to tour poll-bound States.

A day after Anna Hazare strongly pitched for the Right to Reject clause in elections, the Gandhian has stated that he would tour all the poll-bound states. Many States are having assembly polls next year.

Prominent member of Team Anna, Arvind Kejriwal made an announcement in this regard while addressing the media in Anna’s village Ralegaon Siddhi on Sunday.

Kejriwal said core committee members of Team Anna would declare their assets on their website by October 15.

Diversifying Team Anna’s campaign against electoral reforms, Kejriwal had said on Saturday that Hazare will write to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, seeking his views on having an annual performance audit of the MPs.

Hazare on Saturday also had urged people to 'gherao' houses of MPs opposed to the Jan Lokpal Bill. "We should gherao the houses of MPs opposing the Jan Lokpal bill. They should not be allowed to come out," the 74-year-old told a meeting of anti-corruption activists.

Meanwhile, Prashant Bhushan, another core committee member of team Anna, has slammed Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh by saying “Digvijay has a habit of making false accusations”. The senior lawyer said that they would take legal action against Digvijay Singh.

9/11 and terror: The war has to begin and end in Pakistan.

It is 10 years since that fateful morning when 19 terrorists took control of four aircraft, three of which struck the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. The attacks that left over 3,000 dead seemed to herald the beginning of the age of ‘super-terrorism’. The United States led by President George W Bush responded with a declaration of war on terrorism. The strategic doctrine that underpinned this ‘war on terror’ was a combination of defence and deterrence on American soil and attack and prevention overseas.


The contribution of each of these elements to American security is open to question. But it is clear that the offensive and preventive component of this strategy has pitched the US in prolonged conflicts with no easy end in sight. In Iraq, combat operations may have ceased but the political reconciliation essential for a stable peace has proved elusive. The war in Afghanistan continues to take its toll without an edifying end in sight. Meanwhile, the US finds itself involved in overt or covert operations in a range of other countries—Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Nigeria to name a few. On the 10th anniversary of 9/11, the Obama administration is bound to talk up its major success in the war on terror: the killing of Osama Bin Laden earlier this year. The impact of Bin Laden’s death on the effectiveness of al Qaeda remains to be seen.


Preliminary assessments differ depending on the analyst’s views about the organisational nature and structure of Al Qaeda. Those who believe that al Qaeda is a centralised outfit plotting, coordinating and executing major terrorist attacks think that the death of Bin Laden is a severe blow. The attacks that left over 3,000 dead seemed to herald the beginning of the age of ‘super-terrorism’. Those who believe that al Qaeda is a flat, networked outfit operating with franchises claim that Bin Laden’s passing is not going to make much of an operational difference.


Neither of these views is entirely convincing, for they overlook the central contribution of Bin Laden to al Qaeda’s functioning. Osama shrewdly understood the diffused nature of power in a world of global communications. Contemporary conflicts are as much, if not more, about winning the battle of public opinion as about winning the battles on the ground. The ability to craft and disseminate convincing narratives—about the nature of the struggle, the stakes involved, the progress of operations and the eventual outcome—is a crucial dimension of warfare in the early 21st century. Bin Laden was an outstanding purveyor of the al Qaeda’s narratives—messages that drew and secured support for the outfit in its attempt to take on the US.


His death may or may not affect the operational effectiveness of al Qaeda, but it will certainly diminish its ability to appeal to new bases of support and approval.The Obama administration can also draw comfort from the fact that the ongoing upheaval in the Middle East has taken the form of popular, democratic protests. The al Qaeda’s message appears to have little resonance with the crowds that throng the main squares and thoroughfares across the Arab world.


To be sure, there are Islamist outfits of various kinds involved in these protests. But their ideology and politics is considerably different from that of al Qaeda. Set against these positive developments are more worrying trends. The most problematic of these is the conflict in the Afghanistan-Pakistan theatre. The elimination of Bin Laden has created the necessary political backdrop for an American withdrawal from Afghanistan. But the exit may not be all that smooth. For one thing, the insurgency has proven more resilient and adaptive than anticipated by American strategists. General David Petraeus’ much feted counter-insurgency strategy has not been as successful as the Pentagon would like us to believe. Claims about the ‘momentum’ of the insurgency being broken betray a serious misunderstanding of the nature of counter-insurgency warfare.


Control of territory, not momentum of operations, is the key factor in counter-insurgency—particularly when the insurgency has an external base. The US military’s performance on this score has so far been decidedly mixed. Equally dubious is the assumption about a smooth transfer of operational responsibility to the Afghan security forces. In the past year an additional 100,000 Afghan personnel have reportedly been recruited and trained. But their operational mettle is yet to be tested seriously.


Besides given the persistent problems over the availability of Western trainers, it seems unwise to rely too much on the capability of the Afghan forces. To be sure, there will be a residual American presence to shore up the Afghan forces. But the insurgency is also morphing in more dangerous ways. The last couple of months have seen a surge in the use of improvised explosive devices and in the assassination of senior Afghan leaders.


Efforts to reach out to the Taliban have been halting. The possibility of a negotiated settlement is made much more difficult by the fact that the Taliban is no longer a unified entity. There are several factions and associated groups that have considerable operational independence. The upshot of it is that the Americans will have to rely on all available partners to create a patchwork of small deals with these outfits.


The most important of these potential partners is Pakistan. But, as many American officials realise, it is the least reliable of partners. The challenge of dealing with Pakistan is compounded by the fact that Pakistan is also the main focus of America’s battle against the al Qaeda and its affiliates. (As far as India is concerned, Pakistan has always been the epicentre of terrorist concerns – whether it is 26/11 or the latest Delhi blast which is being laid at the door of HuJi – a Bangladesh outfit with links to Pakistan’s ISI. The US not only depends on Pakistan for cooperation on intelligence and covert operations, but is also concerned about the possibility of Pakistani nukes falling in jihadi hands. Washington does hold certain critical levers like economic aid to Pakistan. But the Obama administration believes that sanctions or conditions-based aid will not work. Figuring out how to deal with Pakistan is the single most important challenge in America’s struggle against terrorism. Unless the Obama administration takes a more realistic tack, the US might find itself embroiled in the region for another decade.

Delhi blast: The pillars of the Indian state are crumbling

On the face of it, a court where ordinary people flock for redressal of mundane disputes may seem an unlikely target for terrorists. No cause is meaningfully advanced by blowing to bits people who are just going through the timeless grind of the legal system. Yet, if there’s one overarching message from yesterday’s blast at the Delhi High Court, which killed 11 people, it is that it expands the range of the pillars of the Indian state that have now been targeted by terrorists. Bomb blasts and terrorist strikes in Mumbai have typically targeted commercial interests – the stock exchange, the diamond bourse and the teeming markets, among others. That’s because Mumbai is in many ways the engine of India’s economy, and targeting the money trail gets the terrorists more bang for their vile efforts.

Wednesday's blast at the Delhi High Court is the latest instance of terrorists targeting the symbols of the Indian state. But since Delhi is all about temporal power, it is the pillars of the state that are being targeted. The strand that connects yesterday’s blast with the high-profile attack on the Red Fort in 2000 and the Parliament complex in 2001 is that all of them are powerful symbols of a democratic state. With all its historical associations, the Red Fort represents the majesty of Indian executive authority. And Parliament is (despite the ongoing debate over whether its members are worthy of the privilege they are accorded) today the potent symbol of a working Indian democracy. If the targets in the past were the executive and the legislature, yesterday’s attack was aimed at the judiciary, the third pillar of the Indian state. Tragically, however, the blood price in every case is paid by ordinary folks who are unrepresentative of the might of the state, and in fact are themselves victims in their own way. The connection with the 2001 attack on Parliament is doubly reinforced by the purported reason for yesterday’s attack. The terror group that has reportedly claimed responsibility for yesterday’s blast, the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HuJI), is believed to have demanded the withdrawal of the death sentence on Afzal Guru, who has been convicted for the attack on Parliament. Faced with such an open and overwhelming challenge to its authority, the response of the Indian state – and, in fact, all the elements that go to make up the edifice of our parliamentary democracy – has been monumentally inept. For although the death sentence was handed down after due – and laborious – process of law, it has now become the subject of political back-and-forth. An effort is now on in the Jammu & Kashmir Assembly to pass a resolution to demand that the death sentence on Afzal Guru be commuted.

First, Parliament, one of the most powerful symbols of the Indian democracy, is targeted by vile terrorists; then the executive authority of the day is unable or unwilling to implement the verdict in the case handed down by the judiciary; to compound that, the entire political establishment plays political football with the judicial verdict. …It’s easy to see why terrorists have been emboldened into repeated attacks on the might of the Indian state: they know they can get away with it, given the ineffectual response of the executive and the natural inclinations of the political establishment across the spectrum to play one-upmanship games with the issue of terrorism.

HuJI or Indian Mujahideen?

Just a day after the Delhi bomb blast outside the High Court, investigating agency National Investigating Agency (NIA) has been confused as they received two emails from two prominent terror groups claiming the responsibility of the blast.


NIA started probing an email sent by Indian Mujahideen (IM) which on Thursday, Sep 8 claimed that they were responsible and masterminded the blast outside the court in the national capital.


The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) official also informed, "Mail can't be ignored, we will investigate it." Indian Mujahideen is being parented by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT).


Earlier Harkat-ul- Jehadi (HuJI) had claimed the responsibility of the blast. It has also been reported that HuJI had sent an email to a media house citing that this blast in the High Court was in retaliation to the death sentence pronounced on Afzal Guru, who has been convicted in the Parliament Attack case. 

Quake-prone Delhi lacks safety measures: Expert

With Wednesday night's earthquake still haunting many in north India, aNational Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) official said the tremor was just a reminder of the vulnerability of Delhi and neighbouring areas which lack safety measures.

According to India Meteorological Department (IMD), the 4.2 Richter scale quake shook Delhi and neighbouring areas at 11.28 pm. The epicentre of the quake was in Sonepat in Haryana, about 90 km from Delhi.

The NDMA official said Thursday that Delhi was in a high-risk seismic zone prone to earthquakes measuring 7-7.5 on the Richter scale.

"If such a high intensity earthquake comes, we have no safety measures implemented,"the NDMA official, pleading anonymity, told IANS.

"The national capital is about 300 km from the Himalayan collision zone but the tremors there could have an effect here," he said.

The Yamuna river and the adjoining areas have a high risk of earthquake. East and northeast Delhi are the most vulnerable because the soil in these areas is alluvial (smooth and unconsolidated).

According to BR Vaidya, director, seismology department, IMD, a project was underway to identify the maximum risk areas.

“Usually the area along rivers is more vulnerable because of the loose soil... the water content in the soil also matters,” Vaidya said.

He said an earthquake above 5 Richter scale can cause major damage in the national capital.The NDMA official added that there was a need for a re-look at Delhi's town planning.

“After Gujarat earthquake in 2001, the town planning there has been tremendously changed but Delhi, which is prone to frequent mild tremors, is yet to learn its lessons,” he said.

"It is high time we constructed earthquake-resistant buildings. Not just the centre, but state governments should also bring in stringent building by-laws," he said.

"Senseless construction of buildings should be avoided and at least one foot distance between two building should be maintained. Multi-storeyed buildings are dangerous," the NDMC official added.

Delhi earthquake shakes city for a second time after deadly bomb blast

An earthquake struck New Delhi Wednesday, shaking the city just hours after a deadly bomb exploded outside the high court. It was a minor quake for the earthquake-prone city, coming in at 4.3 magnitude, but for the already-nervous populace, it rattled already frayed nerves.

A bomb blast struck the capital’s high court complex in the morning, killing 11 people and injuring at least 76. The violence was claimed by a terrorist organization seeking an immediate end to the prison sentence of Afzal Guru, a Kashmiri convicted for his role in a 2001 attack on India’s Parliament. At first, people reported on Twitter that the shake made them think a second round of violence had started. However, after the first shock wore off, people quickly turned to humor to downplay the scare.

The intensity was 4.2 and the epicentre was Sonepat," Shailesh Nayak, Secretary in Ministry of Earthsciences, and IMD Director General Ajit Tyagi, told PTI.

The quake sent shivers among citizens who ran out of the high-rise buildings.

There were no immediate reports of any casualty. The fire brigade and police said they have not received any immediate calls of casualty or damage.A report from Chandigarh said that tremors were felt in Panipat, Faridabad, Gurgaon among others towns of Haryana. People rushed out of their homes in Chandigarh and Sonepat. The tremor was felt very "sharp for some seconds" in Sonepat, witnesses said.

There were no immediate reports of any casualty, police said. Meanwhile, Bollywood superstar Amitabh Bachchan mentioned about the tremor on his Twitter page." The blast in Delhi in the morning and just now a 6.6 earthquake in Delhi.....just spoke to my daughter, it was horrifying but all safe," Bachchan said."Hearts and prayers for those who lost loved ones earlier today in the blast... and I do hope there has been no casualties

Bomb blast outside court 11 killed in New Delhi

A powerful bomb hidden in a briefcase ripped through a crowd of people waiting to enter a New Delhi courthouse Wednesday, killing 11 people and wounding scores more in the deadliest attack in India’s capital in nearly three years. An al-Qaida-linked group claimed responsibility, though government officials said it was too early to name a suspect.
The attack outside the High Court came despite a high alert across the city and renewed doubts about India’s ability to protect even its most important institutions despite overhauling security after the 2008 Mumbai siege. “Have we become so vulnerable that terrorist groups can almost strike at will?” opposition lawmaker Arun Jaitley asked in Parliament.
The bomb left a deep crater on the road and shook the courthouse, sending lawyers and judges fleeing outside. “There was smoke everywhere. People were running. People were shouting. There was blood everywhere. It was very, very scary,” said lawyer Sangeeta Sondhi, who was parking her car near the gate when the bomb exploded. The government rallied Indians to remain strong in the face of such attacks.
“We will never succumb to the pressure of terrorists,” Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said during a visit to neighboring Bangladesh. “This is a long war in which all political parties and all the people of India will have to stand united so that this scourge of terrorism is crushed.” The bomb exploded about 10:14 a.m. near a line of more than 100 people waiting at a reception counter for passes to enter the court building to have their cases heard.
The blast killed 11 people and wounded 76 others. Their identities were not available, but no judge were among the victims. People ran to assist the injured, piling them into three-wheeled taxis to take them to the hospital. Ambulances and forensic teams rushed to the scene, along with sniffer dogs and a bomb disposal unit, apparently checking for any further explosives.
Renu Sehgal, a 42-year-old housewife with a case before the court, had just received her pass and was standing nearby with her uncle and mother while her husband parked their car when she heard the explosion. “The sound was so huge and suddenly people started running,” she said. “We were all in such a big panic. I’m lucky I survived.” The court building was evacuated after the attack.
The blast probe was quickly turned over to the National Investigation Agency, established after the Mumbai siege to investigate and prevent terror attacks. Police were scouring the city for possible suspect, searching hotels, bus stands, railway stations and the airport, said top security official U.K. Bansal. All roads out of the city were under surveillance as well, he siad.
Late Wednesday, police also released two sketches they said were based on descriptions given by eyewitnesses who claimed they had seen someone with a briefcase waiting in line outside the building. “We are determined to attack down the perpetrators of this horrific crime and bring them to justice,” Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram told Parliament. An email sent to several TV news channels claimed the bombing on behalf of Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami, an Islamic extremist group said to be based in Pakistan that was blamed for numerous terror strikes in India.
The U.S. State Department says the group has deep ties to al-Qaida, and some of its members have trained at the groups camps. The email demanded the immediate repeal of the death sentence handed to Afzal Guru, a Kashmiri man convicted to target other courts, including the Supreme Court. “We cannot say anything about the email until we have investigated it thoroughly,” NIA chief S.C. Sinha said. “At this point the investigation is fully open and it’s not possible to name any group.”
The court bombing was the first major terror attack in India since a trio of blasts in Mumbai killed 26 people on July 13. Suspicion for those attacks fell on the shadow extremist network known as the Indian Mujahedeen, though no one has been arrested. The bombers struck the court, an appeals panel below India’s Supreme Court, even though the capital had been on high alert because Parliament was in session. On May 25, a small explosion that appeared to be a failed car bomb erupted in the court’s parking lot.
After the 2008 Mumbai attacks, the government expanded police recruiting and training, set up the NIA and established commando bases across the country so rapid reaction forces could swiftly arrive at the scene on an attack. Jaitley, in Parliament, said the court bombing raised “deep concern” about “the kind of institutions and systems we have to build to fight this menace.” But official say the number of targets in a nation of 1.2 billion makes it impossible to provide full security.
Dharmendra Kumar, a senior police officer, told reporters the court building itself was strongly protected by police but the explosion hit a busy main road outside. K.P.S. Gill, a former senior police official, said Kumar’s comment showed the police had a “ridiculous mindset” and India needed to rethink its strategy on Preventing terror. “If the public collects there, then you must protect that area,” Gill said.
The attack rekindled memories of the string of deadly bombings that rocked the country in 2008, including a series of coordinated bomb blasts in New Delhi on Sept. 13 that killed 21 people. Many of those attacks were blamed on militant groups composed of disaffected Muslins furious at perceived injustices at the hands of India’s Hindu majority. But that violence mostly abated after the November 2008 siege of Mumbai, when 10 Pakistan-based militants wreaked havoc across India’s commercial capital for 60 hours, killing 166 people.
However, a series of smaller attacks raised concerns in recent months that the violence was returning. Last Sept. 19, two gunmen on a motorcycle shot and wounded two Taiwanese men outside a famous New Delhi mosque. A few minutes later, a bomb rigged to a nearby car malfunctioned and caught fire. On Dec 7, a bomb exploded in the city of Varanasi, killing a 2-year-old, and a few months later came the failed attack on the High Court in New Delhi. Wednesday a statement from the government of Pakistan expressed “deepest sympathies” for the families of those killed in the explosion and the government and people of India.