The fury and rage in the city against central and local politicians, the coast guard, intelligence agencies, sections of the media, the soft approach to terrorism, is perfectly understandable, indeed to a large extent justifiable. However, put together, the decibel level of the protest is a bit over the top. It is as if the dreadful terror attack Mumbai has experienced is unprecedented, singularly different from what that city itself has seen (1993, 257 dead) and very, very different from the frequent blasts in other parts of the country. The round-the-clock television coverage could possibly have heightened the feeling, while the burning down of ‘icons’ in south Mumbai doubtless added to the sense of outrage. Nevertheless, the proposition that the city is uniquely cursed, neglected, targeted, defenceless is somewhat exaggerated.
For those of us who live in Delhi, terror attacks are painfully familiar. Other cities too have shed blood and witnessed large-scale devastation. Mumbai is indeed an extraordinary metropolis, not just in terms of the lolly it contributes to national coffers but because of its generosity and free spirit. But does it have any special claims on the nation? "Enough is Enough" applies not just to Mumbai but also to Moradabad and Mangalore. This particular carnage may work as a catalyst, the tipping point in citizen resentment against a callous state, but for Mumbaikars to demand extra privileges and extra security simply because they live in the coveted ‘pot of gold’ is unfair and undemocratic.
By the way, when I hear the ‘beautiful’ people and the ‘ugly’ people say, ‘How could they do this to my city?’ I’d like to correct them. Mumbai is not ‘my’ city, but ‘our’ city.
