Congress policy on terror is an apologetic stand of the Nehru era

Looking at the UPA's policies on terror it was clear that it wanted to take an apologetic stand and not call out the real enemy. The fact that the Congress said that Sonia Gandhi wept after the Batla House encounter is testimony to the fact what the stand of the Congress was and is.

New Delhi, Dec 19: During the campaign for the Gujarat Assembly Elections, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that the Congress was soft on terror.

Close on the heels of that statement came a remark by Congress leader, D K Shivakumar asking who had asked the police to declare the Mangaluru blast accused, Mohammad Shariq as a terrorist. Who is the terrorist and was it an act of terror like we witnessed in Mumbai, Delhi, Kashmir or Pulwama, he had asked.

Going beyond politics and strictly sticking to data, terror did peak during the rule of the Congress led UPA between 2004 and 2014. Between July 20096 and November 26 2008 the country witnessed the train blasts in Mumbai. Moreover there was a blast that took place by the Indian Mujahideen every six weeks.

The Indian Mujahideen had managed to penetrate every nook and corner of the country. It targeted Hyderabad, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Mumbai, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Karnataka just a name a few. The fact that the UPA sat over these incidents clueless was evident in the fact that the Indian Mujahideen which was on a wreckage was only operating as a group of four led by Yasin Bhatkal.

Then the was the Mumbai 26/11 attacks as well. The UPA led government did not have an inkling of what was going on. It sent the NSG late, it refused to probe the Indian angle to the blast and had no idea of the existence of a David Headly who visited India so many time to carry out a reconnaissance in Mumbai as well as Pune.

The fact the Congress has been soft on terror is out there to see. Once it came to power in 2004, it immediately repealed the Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act (POTA). This act was in fact one of the most important deterrents for terrorists in the country.

Now comparing the BJP led NDA's reaction to both the Uri and Pulwama attacks. Following Uri the Indian Army executed a surgical strike in Pakistan. Following Pulwama in which 40 Indian jawans died, India struck at the Balakot facility of the Jaish-e-Mohammad in Pakistan. Former officer with the Research and Analysis Wing tells OneIndia that Balakot had been mapped 16 years before the hit in 2019, but the regimes never had guts to strike. The Prime Minister Narendra Modi led government had the courage to strike it, he also added.

Before we go any further, let us remind ourselves that Congress leader Sonia Gandhi had shed tears when our brave police officials from Delhi had hit an Indian Mujahideen hub in Batla House.

Looking at the response of the UPA government in the aftermath of the 26/11 attacks, it was clear that it wanted to do nothing with it. At the time of the attack the same Indian Air Force which hit Balakot was headed by Air Chief Marshal Fali Major. The media was debating whether India would punish Pakistan for such a horrific attack in which 160 innocents were killed? Air Marshal Fali Major had told this correspondent that the IAF was ready to hit Pakistan. However the government did not make up its mind on whether or not to hit Pakistan.

To make matters worse the likes of Digvijaya Singh decided to harp on Hindu terror. He also went on to take part in the launch of a horrific book called, 26/11- RSS ki saazish."

Looking at the manner in which the Congress has dealt with terror it is evident they are still living in the Nehurian era. In 1951, the then President of India Dr. Rajendra Prasad was invited to inaugurate the Somnath Temple in Gujarat. The restoration of the Temple was historic because it had stood the test of time as it had been ravaged many times by invaders. The then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had written to Dr. Prasad asking him to reconsider his decision as the President of a secular country doing so would have numerous implications. Dr. Prasad went ahead and inaugurated the Temple, but on Nehru's insistence he had to do it in his personal capacity.