It is an indication of the extent of internalisation of terrorism as a way of life that each new terror attack results in a markedly subdued response. While the United States takes pride in not having had a single terror attack since 9/11, and that was ten years ago, there have been over half a dozen since the 26/11 siege of Bombay in 2008.

Over two dozen people died in Bombay jus two months ago, and Delhi high court was the sight of a similar attack as today’s in May this year. However, the response of the political class, and indeed of the media and public, is substantially different depending on the city, the location and on the class of victims.

While each terror attack under the watch of the sartorially splendid Shivraj Patil would prompt demands for his resignation, the media-savvy Palaniappan Chidambaram goes about each terror attack like a second-division clerk, reading bureaucratic cliches with mind-numbing monotony that should leave terror-mongers stone cold.

Worse, there is scarcely any remorse with scarcely a mention of the “Q” word, and this while the home ministry uses up all the IQ of its Harvard-educated minister to dig up dirt on the Bhushans, Hazares and Kejirwals of the world. So, here’s the question neither Parliament nor the opposition, nor the media would want to ask: should Chidambaram resign, or at least make the offer, just at least to show where the buck stops?

Also read: Is Chidambaram a saboteur in UPA?