Beyond Blasts: Decoding the Terror Web Across Delhi, Gujarat and Faridabad

Paromita Das

New Delhi, 15th  November: The recent series of terror-related incidents involving a car blast in Delhi, arrests of three ISIS-affiliated terrorists by Gujarat ATS, and the discovery of 2900 kilograms of explosives in Faridabad have sparked a nationwide investigation into their connections and masterminds. While security agencies from multiple states and central forces are rigorously probing these attacks, political narratives around the incidents are equally intense, particularly comments from leaders of the Samajwadi Party that have provoked controversy and speculation about political motives and alliances.

A Web of Terror: Delhi, Gujarat, and Faridabad

The Gujarat Anti-Terrorist Squad made significant arrests of three terrorists linked to ISIS, accused of planning major attacks across the country, including recces at the RSS office in Lucknow and the busy Azadpur Mandi in Delhi. The detainees were found in possession of firearms, chemical substances such as castor oil used for making ricin (a deadly toxin), and were reportedly under the instructions of handlers connected to the Islamic State Khorasan Province and Pakistan. Meanwhile, the Faridabad operation uncovered a massive cache of explosives involving multiple arrests with suspected ties to the Jaish-e-Mohammed and Ansar Ghazwat-ul-Hind terror groups. The Delhi Red Fort car blast, which killed several, is under multi-agency investigation with links being explored between the vehicle used and terror modules operating in Jammu & Kashmir and Haryana. This series of events points to a highly coordinated and cross-linked terror network operating across states with multiple targets intended to destabilize national security.​

Political Controversies and Narratives

Against this backdrop of law enforcement’s crackdown, political discourse has taken a charged tone, particularly with statements from leaders of the Samajwadi Party. Abu Azmi, Maharashtra unit president and legislator from the party, made headlines for redefining terrorism from their perspective — framing terrorists as victims of “injustice and oppression” rather than mere perpetrators of violence. He argued that terrorism stems from suffering and thus terrorists should be looked at as aggrieved individuals, a stance that many find controversial and dangerously sympathetic to extremists. Azmi also cautioned against “false arrests,” urging agencies to arrest only the true culprits, reflecting mistrust in investigations reminiscent of past cases like the Mumbai blasts Abu Azmi had changed the definition of a terrorist, saying that a terrorist is a victim. Abu Azmi says that there should not be arbitrary arrests.​

These political remarks seem to signal an attempt to protect certain elements or at least question the thoroughness and integrity of ongoing investigations. The timing and tone of these statements have raised eyebrows, with analysts surmising that political stakes could be driving attempts at narrative shaping, potentially to pre-empt any links coming to light between terror modules and influential political actors or factions. This partisan stance complicates the national effort to address terrorism free from political interference.

The Broader Implications and Challenges

This situation highlights the profound challenges Bharat faces in combating terrorism which now involves multi-layered conspiracies, chemical weapons, and international terror networks. The nexus between terror groups, cross-border influences, and local political dynamics shows how terrorism is deeply intertwined with socio-political ecosystems, requiring a nuanced approach that goes beyond arrests and seizures.

Moreover, the political debate around terrorism definitions and victimization narratives risks blurring the lines between justified law enforcement actions and political agendas. Ensuring transparency, accountability, and impartiality in investigations is critical to maintaining public trust and dismantling terror networks effectively.

Vigilance Beyond Politics

The strategic security operations by agencies are commendable in uncovering and halting imminent attacks. However, the specter of politicization of terror incidents can undermine collective efforts and national unity. Terrorism, with its devastating human cost and threat to social harmony, demands firm condemnation and decisive action. Defining terrorists as victims due to socio-political grievances does not negate responsibility for violence and loss of innocent lives. Such narratives, if unchecked, may embolden extremist ideologies rather than contain them.

Security agencies must be insulated from political pressures to ensure investigations reach their logical conclusions, bringing all perpetrators to justice irrespective of their political connections. Public discourse should support national security imperatives rather than sow division or doubt among citizens.

Strengthening Bharat’s Resolve

The convergence of terror modules in Delhi, Gujarat, and Faridabad unveils a dangerous pattern of organized extremism that Bharatiya security agencies are actively countering. While arrests and seizures mark operational success, the political theater surrounding these events calls for careful scrutiny. Bharat’s fight against terrorism must remain a united front focused on justice, truth, and safety. Politics should not cloud national security imperatives; instead, all stakeholders need to foster an environment of cooperation and resilience against those who threaten peace. This moment underscores the need for vigilance, firm law enforcement, and a clear-eyed political responsibility to uphold the nation’s security and communal harmony.