Dangerous foe

Sir — The attack on the Mehran naval base shows that the Pakistan Taliban have the firepower to attack Pakistan’s defence establishments at will (“Danger signals”, May 25). It is possible that the attack was aided by insiders in Pakistan’s military establishment. Ordinary people in Pakistan are caught in the crossfire between fundamentalists and the nation’s security forces. It has been proved that the country’s civil and military installations are vulnerable to attack. The administration has been unsuccessful in securing the people’s safety. One must now consider the fearful prospect of Pakistan’s nuclear arms falling into the hands of fundamentalist forces. Should that happen, India will have cause for worry, since Pakistan is a neighbour. The United States of America will also be a likely target.

Yours faithfully,
Bichu Muttathara, Pune

Sir — The attack at Mehran was perhaps the biggest strike by the Pakistan Taliban (“Sewer rats gnaw at Pak guts”, May 24). It was apparently carried out in retaliation to the killing of Osama bin Laden and in protest of the Pakistan government’s ties with the US. The ease with which the Taliban gained access to what is supposed to be a high-security zone indicates that other military bases are equally vulnerable. However, Pakistan’s interior minister, Rehman Malik, has attempted to gloss over the growing strength of the Taliban.

Yours faithfully,
J. Akshobhya, Mysore

Sir — The assault on the Mehran base proves that terror has no religion. The Taliban attacked an important security base in Pakistan even though it is a Muslim country. India, too, has been attacked by terrorists trained in Pakistan. Pakistan, however, has categorically denied its involvement in terror activities in India. The Mehran attack proved to be an eye-opener for the Pakistan administration. Many years ago, the Taliban destroyed the Bamiyan Buddha statues in Afghanistan, displaying its contempt for peace and religious harmony.

Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is not safe — the militants may gain access to them any time. India should remain alert to avert a possible terror attack.

Yours faithfully,
A.K. Chakraborty, Guwahati

Under pressure

Sir — The new chief minister of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, has bitten off more than she can chew (“La nuit Bengal”, May 22). Her decision to look after a large number of sensitive portfolios has raised eyebrows. Many deserving people in the Trinamul Congress have no portfolios. Banerjee could have allotted some important posts to them.

Instead, she has chosen to singlehandedly look after important matters such as land and land reforms, power, health and family welfare, minority affairs, agriculture and hill affairs. To bring about improvement and development, all of these require very serious attention. It is impossible for one person to do justice to so many important matters. In all probability, she will start feeling the pressure of the job soon. Contrary to her promise of a small ministry, Banerjee was sworn in with 44 ministers. She should realize that there is no point in being a Jack of all trades and a master of none.

Yours faithfully,
Indranil Sanyal, Calcutta

Sir — One of the assurances made by Mamata Banerjee soon after the TMC’s election victory was of a small and compact cabinet. It was a welcome sign, since it signalled a change from the practices of the previous regime. It is always better to keep governance under the watchful eyes of a few capable hands. For one who claims to always stick to her word, Banerjee’s decision to stretch her council of ministers to 44 — the maximum permissible limit in a legislative assembly comprising 294 seats — was a huge disappointment. This shows that she too is vulnerable to political pressures from within. This will be a classic case of too many cooks spoiling the broth. For instance, instead of one minister tackling the task of uplifting the education sector wholeheartedly, several persons will look after different segments of education; they will end up approaching the matter in their own ways. This could be disastrous for the state, and prove to be bad for governance.

Yours faithfully,
Suman Sankar Dasgupta, Calcutta