The last time I went to German Bakery, my twin sons insisted on having a slice of chocolate cake. I told them we could have it next time, since we came to Pune so often on weekends anyway. I broke my promise. For the next image I saw was the bakery blown to bits. A newspaper sketch diagram showed the bomb placement exactly where my family used to sit, in the outdoor area. My first thought after the Saturday night attack was: it could have been us.
German Bakery was not a particularly upscale place – dishes cost far less than national coffee-shop chains. It had a relaxed vibe, due to the monk-robed Osho ashram customers. Ironically, it would be one of the last places you would associate with violence. Almost every college student or young professional in Pune would have visited this popular youth hangout. Not surprisingly, many of the dead were young students.
German Bakery was not a particularly upscale place – dishes cost far less than national coffee-shop chains. It had a relaxed vibe, due to the monk-robed Osho ashram customers. Ironically, it would be one of the last places you would associate with violence. Almost every college student or young professional in Pune would have visited this popular youth hangout. Not surprisingly, many of the dead were young students.
The first reaction to such a horrific incident is emotional. The more relatedness you feel with the event, the more difficult it becomes to think straight. Feelings of rage, despair and grief intermingle. Media reports, whether intentionally or not, repeatedly show the horror, tap into this emotion and exacerbate it.
“Is anyone safe?”, “Was the police sleeping?”, “It’s the politician’s fault”, “Screw all talk of peace, killPakistan” are phrases you see tossed around on TV, the internet and in conversations. I understand the mental state where such comments come from. However, such outcry does not help solve the problem. In fact, stew such emotions too long, and it becomes ripe for a politician to sway people into hating a particular country and a particular religion. And yet, the problem is not addressed.
The problem, at a factual level, is about a few deranged people who can relatively easily toss a bomb or fire guns at innocent people at a popular venue, and attract almost immediate attention worldwide. This attention is the biggest incentive for such an act. These people, or terrorists, also have a twisted moral justification. They do not perceive their victims to be innocent, even if the victim’s ‘crime’ in their head is belonging to a particular religion or country. Also, the terrorists do not place a very high value on their own life, for in many cases they get caught or killed.
How do you deal with such a problem? It is certainly not easy. Venue-specific security measures help for sure. However, the solution lies in addressing four areas – managing the randomness, curtailing the availability of explosives, limiting the attention incentive and improving opportunities to limit dissonance.
The first step is reducing randomness. There isn’t much one can do if a lunatic decides to launch a shooting spree at a random venue. However, it should be noted that there is a finite number of such people. Also, it doesn’t represent the character trait of a particular country or community. Even if there are 10,000 terrorists, that’s still only 0.001 per cent of our population.
Also, while spread out, given the logistics required and their ideology, terrorists will be connected. Akin to social networking sites, there has to be a loose structure that puts them at least in various clusters, if not one organisation. It makes any terrorists caught alive, or other leads such as phone records (drilled down to the next level) extremely valuable. This mapping could make finding them less random. This effort has to be led by an independent, empowered and capable organisation. The same people who solve domestic robbery cases may not have the bandwidth, though on the ground police can sniff out leads.
Second, curtailing the easy availability of explosives. Try finding RDX in China, you’ll be in jail faster than you figure out the acronym. However, in India, a newspaper sting team obtained it in a couple of hours. Why can’t we successfully ban RDX and all such dangerous compounds? Maybe RDX has some legitimate uses, but given how a bagful of it can shatter the nation’s spirit – is it worth it? Surely, explosives are manufactured somewhere, or imported across the border at some venue. Can the people involved be hunted down?
The third step is to reduce the attention, particularly the emotional aspects, given by the media to such attacks. While news has to be reported, guidelines can be drawn up between TV channels on how much gore and suffering have to be shown vs the actual facts of the event. The fourth and final step is the long drawn one, where a country must develop to create opportunities for young people , so there is less likelihood of people choosing to become terrorists. Anyone with a good education, a job and an optimistic view on life is less likely to blow up a peaceful place.
We cannot take away the pain felt by all affected. However, rational steps can reduce such horrific acts. They will make way for a more peaceful and better life for Indians, who’d much rather have chocolate cake with their kids than live a life hating another community or country.
“Is anyone safe?”, “Was the police sleeping?”, “It’s the politician’s fault”, “Screw all talk of peace, killPakistan” are phrases you see tossed around on TV, the internet and in conversations. I understand the mental state where such comments come from. However, such outcry does not help solve the problem. In fact, stew such emotions too long, and it becomes ripe for a politician to sway people into hating a particular country and a particular religion. And yet, the problem is not addressed.
The problem, at a factual level, is about a few deranged people who can relatively easily toss a bomb or fire guns at innocent people at a popular venue, and attract almost immediate attention worldwide. This attention is the biggest incentive for such an act. These people, or terrorists, also have a twisted moral justification. They do not perceive their victims to be innocent, even if the victim’s ‘crime’ in their head is belonging to a particular religion or country. Also, the terrorists do not place a very high value on their own life, for in many cases they get caught or killed.
How do you deal with such a problem? It is certainly not easy. Venue-specific security measures help for sure. However, the solution lies in addressing four areas – managing the randomness, curtailing the availability of explosives, limiting the attention incentive and improving opportunities to limit dissonance.
The first step is reducing randomness. There isn’t much one can do if a lunatic decides to launch a shooting spree at a random venue. However, it should be noted that there is a finite number of such people. Also, it doesn’t represent the character trait of a particular country or community. Even if there are 10,000 terrorists, that’s still only 0.001 per cent of our population.
Also, while spread out, given the logistics required and their ideology, terrorists will be connected. Akin to social networking sites, there has to be a loose structure that puts them at least in various clusters, if not one organisation. It makes any terrorists caught alive, or other leads such as phone records (drilled down to the next level) extremely valuable. This mapping could make finding them less random. This effort has to be led by an independent, empowered and capable organisation. The same people who solve domestic robbery cases may not have the bandwidth, though on the ground police can sniff out leads.
Second, curtailing the easy availability of explosives. Try finding RDX in China, you’ll be in jail faster than you figure out the acronym. However, in India, a newspaper sting team obtained it in a couple of hours. Why can’t we successfully ban RDX and all such dangerous compounds? Maybe RDX has some legitimate uses, but given how a bagful of it can shatter the nation’s spirit – is it worth it? Surely, explosives are manufactured somewhere, or imported across the border at some venue. Can the people involved be hunted down?
The third step is to reduce the attention, particularly the emotional aspects, given by the media to such attacks. While news has to be reported, guidelines can be drawn up between TV channels on how much gore and suffering have to be shown vs the actual facts of the event. The fourth and final step is the long drawn one, where a country must develop to create opportunities for young people , so there is less likelihood of people choosing to become terrorists. Anyone with a good education, a job and an optimistic view on life is less likely to blow up a peaceful place.
We cannot take away the pain felt by all affected. However, rational steps can reduce such horrific acts. They will make way for a more peaceful and better life for Indians, who’d much rather have chocolate cake with their kids than live a life hating another community or country.