Red Fort Blast and Urban Terrorism in Kashmir

The Red Fort blast in 2025 exposed deep-rooted terror networks in urban Kashmir. Reports suggest the plot took two years to mature, involving three tonnes of explosives. The attack followed the revocation of Article 370 and the conversion of Jammu and Kashmir into a Union Territory. Rising alienation, coupled with communal tensions, fuelled the emergence of an urban terror module comprising educated professionals. The incident revealed intelligence gaps and raised questions about India’s counter-terrorism strategy.

Background and Context

The blast was preceded by growing unrest in Kashmir after the 2019 constitutional changes. Alienation among Muslims increased due to issues like alleged discriminatory policies and communal violence. The 2020 Delhi riots case was seen as a precursor to larger terror activities. The terror module included white-collar urban doctors, denoting the complexity of radicalisation in educated circles.

Terrorist Network and Explosives

The attackers amassed 3,000 kg of explosives, including 350 kg of ammonium nitrate. This quantity could have caused devastation similar to the 1993 Mumbai blasts. The blast at Red Fort was likely accidental, as suicide bombings are rare in Kashmir’s terror culture. The incident exposed sleeper cells operating in cities like Faridabad, Lucknow, and Saharanpur, linked to Kashmir-based groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammad.

Intelligence and Security Failures

Despite arrests of key suspects before the blast, security agencies failed to connect the dots. The transfer of sensitive explosives from Faridabad to Srinagar was unnecessary and risky, leading to a second blast in Nowgam. Past intelligence lapses in Pulwama and Pahalgam attacks show systemic weaknesses. Coordination among police forces and intelligence agencies remains inadequate.

Government Response and Legal Issues

The Centre declared the blast a terrorist act, invoking the new counter-terrorism doctrine. Following the attack, 650 Kashmiris were arrested, including several doctors. The policy of demolishing terrorists’ homes has been criticised as unlawful collective punishment. Political leaders urged the government to avoid alienating the Kashmiri Muslim community further and to adopt a humane approach.

Changing Terrorism Landscape

India’s belief that domestic terrorism had ended is now challenged. Urban radicalisation and lone-wolf attacks have increased. Unlike the US, India lacks a centralised counter-terrorism body similar to the Department of Homeland Security. Efforts at deradicalisation are limited and need expansion. Terrorism in Kashmir remains intertwined with cross-border influences and local grievances.

Global Context of Counter-Terrorism

Post-9/11, global counter-terrorism evolved through various phases and terminologies. From the Global War on Terrorism to Countering Violent Extremism, strategies have adapted to changing threats. Groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS shifted focus to Africa. The Taliban’s return to power in Afghanistan altered regional security dynamics. India’s counter-terrorism must align with evolving global challenges.

Human and Political Dimensions

The role of non-elected governance in Jammu and Kashmir complicates security and political affairs. The elected Chief Minister has limited authority. This arrangement affects local trust and cooperation with security forces. The alienation of Kashmiris risks encouraging more radicalisation. Political dialogue and inclusive governance are crucial for long-term stability.

Questions for UPSC:

1. Discuss in the light of recent events the challenges of urban radicalisation and its impact on national security in India.
2. Critically examine the role of intelligence agencies in preventing terrorism in conflict-prone regions with reference to Jammu and Kashmir.
3. Explain the evolution of global counter-terrorism strategies post-9/11 and discuss their relevance to India’s internal security framework.
4. With suitable examples, discuss the implications of political alienation and governance structures on insurgency movements in India.

Answer Hints:

1. Discuss in the light of recent events the challenges of urban radicalisation and its impact on national security in India.

1. Urban radicalisation involves educated, white-collar individuals (e.g., doctors) joining terror modules, complicating detection.
2. Recent Red Fort blast exposed sleeper cells in urban centers like Faridabad, Lucknow, and Saharanpur linked to Kashmir.
3. Alienation due to socio-political factors (revocation of Article 370, communal tensions) fuels radicalisation.
4. Urban terror networks are decentralized, enabling lone-wolf attacks and difficult intelligence penetration.
5. Impact on national security includes increased terror threats in metropolitan areas, challenging existing counter-terrorism frameworks.
6. Need for enhanced intelligence, deradicalisation programs, and community engagement in urban settings.

2. Critically examine the role of intelligence agencies in preventing terrorism in conflict-prone regions with reference to Jammu and Kashmir.

1. Intelligence failures evident in Red Fort, Pulwama, and Pahalgam attacks due to poor inter-agency coordination.
2. Pre-blast arrests (Faridabad, Saharanpur) were not effectively linked to prevent the Red Fort incident.
3. Human and intelligence resource gaps persist in Kashmir despite ongoing threats and active terror modules.
4. Transfer of explosives from Faridabad to Srinagar was unnecessarily risky, indicating operational lapses.
5. Lack of a centralised counter-terrorism agency akin to the US Department of Homeland Security hampers integrated response.
6. Calls for improved intelligence sharing, focused overwatch, and punitive action against lapses in Kashmir region.

3. Explain the evolution of global counter-terrorism strategies post-9/11 and discuss their relevance to India’s internal security framework.

1. Post-9/11, global strategies evolved from Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) to Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) and Over-the-Horizon operations.
2. Terminologies and approaches adapted to changing threats like Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Far-Right Extremism.
3. US established Department of Homeland Security for integrated domestic security; India lacks a similar centralised body.
4. India’s internal security faces both cross-border terrorism and homegrown radicalisation, needing tailored strategies.
5. Global lessons emphasize intelligence integration, deradicalisation efforts, and community resilience, relevant for India.
6. India must align counter-terrorism doctrine with evolving global threats while addressing local socio-political contexts.

4. With suitable examples, discuss the implications of political alienation and governance structures on insurgency movements in India.

1. Revocation of Article 370 and demotion of J&K to Union Territory increased alienation among Kashmiris.
2. Non-elected Governor holds security powers, while elected CM has limited authority, reducing local trust.
3. Alienation fuels radicalisation and insurgency, as seen in the emergence of urban terror modules post-2019.
4. Collective punishments like demolishing terrorists’ homes exacerbate grievances and perceptions of injustice.
5. Examples – Kashmir unrest post-2019, Pulwama and Pahalgam attacks linked to governance failures.
6. Inclusive governance and political dialogue are essential to reduce insurgency and build long-term stability.