THE burning of Hotel Marriot at Islamabad that Indian TVs showed at length and repeatedly is still etched in the memory of the horrified people. They are worried about Pakistan. Even the hawks do not conceal their anxiety. The intelligentsia’s concern is that the nascent democratic government might not be able to cope with the Al-Qaida-Taliban and might have to depend on the military which would want its price.

People do not know how far the Al-Qaida-Taliban combine has penetrated Pakistan. But the belief is that the Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA), Waziristan and, to a large extent, the NWFP, is under the control of Taliban. Were they to “capture” more territory, what would be its effect on India is the greatest worry. President Asif Ali Zardari’s remark that “the Taliban have an upper hand” is all the more unnerving. America agrees with him.

A Pakistani television commentator has challenged Prime Minister Yusuf Reza Gillani to travel from Kohat to Banu. The commentator’s contention is that the Pakistan government has already “withdrawn” from this area. If this is true, there is some truth in the repeated allegation that former President Pervez Musharraf, even when he wore the uniform, was never serious about curbing the Al-Qaida-Taliban. He found it an effective way to mulct America.

I do not think that the Al-Qaida-Taliban is seeking territory in Pakistan. They want northern areas which would help them to recapture Afghanistan which was under their rule until they were pushed out by the nationalist Afghan forces with the help of America. In fact, the US is responsible for the birth of the Taliban. During the cold war when Washington wanted to bleed Moscow to death, America trained and armed fundamentalists to oust the irreligious Soviet Union from Afghanistan. America won the cold war when the Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of what happened to it in Afghanistan. Those fundamentalists are today’s Taliban and they have the weapons which were liberally provided by America.

Indian civil society does realise that Al-Qaida’s progress in Pakistan is a danger. Already the presence of Al-Qaida has been reported in Kerala, the southern-most state, and in Kashmir, the northern-most. An intelligence agency has linked the recent bomb blasts in the country with the outfit.

What is not probably appreciated amply is that Pakistan’s war against Taliban is India’s war too. If ever Pakistan goes under, India’s first line of defence would collapse. The Taliban would have secured the launching pad to attack India’s values of democracy and liberalism which do not fit into their scheme of things. These are the same Taliban who destroyed the Buddha statute at Bunyan despite the appeal of the entire civilized world.

Terrorism is the means, the Talibalistan is the end. New Delhi and Islamabad should jointly fight against the menace. The two had decided at one time to set up a joint mechanism. Still there is nothing on the ground. Some joint action should have been visible after the blasts at Delhi and Islamabad. The suspicion against each other is so strong that they cannot override it even when the enemy is at work from within. The meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Zardari may change the scenario because both are keen on normalizing relations.

Making peace with the Al-Qaida-Taliban or having a ceasefire with them, as proposed by certain influential quarters in Pakistan, may stall the Taliban but not defeat them. Terrorism is a cancer as Zardari has diagnosed it correctly. “It has to be eliminated.” The villain of the piece is Musharraf who said he was fighting against the Taliban when he was conniving at their penetration. He should be put on the mat for having aggravated the situation. His plan to have them in Afghanistan to get the “strategic depth” for Pakistan started the whole thing.

There is a lesson for New Delhi which is a sad picture of inaction and ineptness when assessed in terms of action taken against communal forces. Law and order has always been a state subject. Still the centre’s response was lukewarm. It sent to Orissa, Karnataka, Mahdya Pradesh and Kerala an advice on the lines of Article 355 which enjoins upon the Union to protect states against external aggression and internal disturbance. Had New Delhi’s order gone under Article 355 itself, the Bajrang Dal, a SIMI among Hindus, would not have openly butchered Christians and burnt churches? Surprisingly, there is no ban on Bajrang Dal.

New Delhi has done well in rejecting the demand of BJP for bringing back the Prevention of Terrorists Activities Act (POTA) which authorised the state to detain people for months without trial. The act was used against the Naxalites and Muslims mercilessly. In this atmosphere, the Muslims would have been the target.

Terrorism, no doubt, leaves death and destruction in its wake. But the most fearsome fallout is the confidence of the people it shakes. Governments can see, after every event, the holes in their intelligence agencies and the other apparatus and promise to do better. But the impact of incidents may well be irreparable because certain communities feel alienated.

This is what has happened after the encounter at Zakir Bagh at Delhi where two terrorists and one police inspector were killed. The debate over the veracity of the “encounter” is still raging. The locality believes it was staged managed. Why such a feeling arises is because of the credibility gap between the people and the authorities. The matter is much more serious: Muslims and Christians have lost faith in the fairness of the state. This will be hard to restore if the secular forces do not assert themselves and retrieve Muslims, Christians and, more so, the Hindus from the bias and prejudice in which many are stuck.

Meanwhile, a survey conducted by a TV network in four big cities—Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai—has shown that 67 per cent of people feel insecure. They are haunted by the fear that they do not know what would happen to them if they were to step out of their home. This is, indeed, a sad reflection on the central and state governments.