Lahore attack

Who did the suspected interrogation centre belong to? Who was responsible for its operation and security? The focus seems to be on the Punjab government, but responsibility was disowned all day. Warnings that the centre was a grave security threat to residents were ignored. Who was responsible for that failure? The chief minister’s office blamed the governor’s, the governor’s office blamed the chief minister’s and everyone else ducked any semblance of responsibility. Given that Monday’s attack was not the first against a ‘secret’ intelligence location in the city, it seems staggering that there still exist such centres in urban residential and commercial areas. Can such suspects not be detained at police stations, prisons or military centres? Why are the lives of civilians being endangered for what appear to be counter-terrorism shortcuts?

The list of questions goes on. The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan spokesman, Azam Tariq, has already claimed responsibility for the attack and promised there will be more if the drone strikes and military operations in the tribal areas do not cease. But was Monday’s attack purely about avenging losses suffered by the militants or was it meant to try and prevent more intelligence being extracted from some of their own by the intelligence agencies? It would have been relatively easy for the militants to surmise that something intelligence related was going on on the premises (area residents, as has been noted, had expressed their concerns about the ‘secure’ facility in their midst), and hence attacked it. But there is also the possibility that the militants themselves had intelligence against the intelligence agencies and picked yesterday to strike for some specific reason. Will we ever know? More importantly, will the intelligence agencies be able to determine if there was some ‘leak’ to the militants?

The attack has also inevitably raised questions about the general state of security in Lahore and the upcoming by-election in NA-123. Over the weekend, Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif toured the city, ostensibly with minimal security in tow, to prove that Lahore is a safe city. On Monday, the militants shredded that claim. True, it is impossible to prevent every incident of terrorism; however, there is a nagging doubt that the law-enforcement and intelligence agencies are not doing everything possible, even within their limited abilities, to stop such acts. (Prevention also includes minimising the risk of attacks by relocating vulnerable targets.) With a National Assembly by-election to be decided in the next few days, the city must remain on the highest state of alert.