WE are a highly polarised nation with a large sectarian, ethnic, linguistic, regional and political base that plays a vital role in providing support for terrorism. To further complicate the problem, international and regional states (both friends and foes) are allegedly pursuing their own goals by covertly supporting this war on our land while undermining our sovereignty. This game is endangering our existence.

Terrorists don’t wear the uniforms of enemy soldiers, and they blend with the locals to avoid getting attention. Law enforcement becomes dependent on effective and actionable intelligence information. Sending a flash message that suicide bombers have entered a city is not enough. It is like asking the authorities to look for a needle in a haystack.

We as a nation are not realising the gravity of this threat and are concentrating on cosmetic arrangements, whereas dire steps are needed. Everyone knows and talks about how important it is to strengthen and coordinate intelligence efforts in the war against terrorism but enough isn’t being done on the ground.

Intelligence agencies within a state always have professional rivalries and indulge in point-scoring, but the leadership has to introduce a system where this rivalry is channelled correctly. This is essential if we want to effectively fight terrorist groups. Sharing information at the Nacta federal secretariat is good but not sufficient. This sharing is through the proper channels of the respective reporting agencies, and usually the information reaches very late. Intelligence information is almost always time-sensitive hence action needs to be taken within a limited time window. The channels of all agencies take their own sweet time when it comes to sending information outside the agency. Mostly, whatever little pieces of information are shared are not actionable.

It’s good to send out a threat alert that a group is preparing for a suicide attack, but the intelligence agency has to come up with the identity and location of the perpetrator. This is hardly done because our agencies are too possessive about whatever information they have, and don’t want to share it at the operational level.

Intelligence coordination is needed among the agencies.

Agencies often waste their efforts due to the absence of a coordinating office. Suspects of one network are apprehended by different agencies and sharing of information between them takes a very long route. By the time it does, it’s too late. Intelligence information is like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, and needs to be collated to see the complete picture. Unfortunately, the pieces are divided among rival agencies and that makes it impossible to complete the puzzle in a timely manner.

Nacta field offices can be brought down to the district level and this can be done without extra expense. The only need is that the leadership of all our intelligence-gathering agencies should forget about taking the lead from one another and be ready to sacrifice for the larger national cause. The competition between field officers/agencies’ staff should be transformed into coordinated and concerted efforts. All intelligence agencies must sit at one table preferably at the district (or division) level with the senior-most intelligence officer (irrespective of which agency he belongs to, to impart a feeling of equality) as its head. What I’m suggesting is hardcore counterterrorism operatives sitting around the table to discuss covert operations, and not the usual get-together kind of intelligence coordination meetings held by DCOs or commissioners.

These joint field offices can be set up on the premises of intelligence agencies to save resources. The counterterrorism database should be available to these joint field offices for speedy action on information being fed from across the country by all the agencies involved in gathering intelligence.

Intelligence agencies do not have equal capabilities and resources. Hence a joint effort would result in the judicious, effective use of resources. It would also eliminate the clash of agencies when they go after each others’ sources unknowingly.

Responsibi­li­ties can be distributed keeping in view the strengths and weaknesses of different agencies at the local level. This will help streamline the race that follows after a terrorist incident, when agencies are running after the perpetrators and sometimes step on each other’s feet.

Our top leadership tells us that we are facing an extraordinary situation and hence extraordinary steps are being taken to tackle the situation. So it’s their responsibility to chalk out such ambitious plans and pursue the agencies for their implementation. This is not an easy task and there will be many bureaucratic hurdles. But the leadership is meant to choose the right path and make everyone follow it. The nation needs to be reassured that our leadership is determined, no matter how daunting or difficult the mission is.

The writer is a retired military officer who has dealt with physical security and intelligence gathering.

Published in Dawn March 5th , 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play