VZCZCXRO0680
RR RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHCG #0398 3430722
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 080722Z DEC 08
FM AMCONSUL CHENNAI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2003
INFO RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI 3424
RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEKDIA/DIA WASHDC
RUEIDN/DNI WASHINGTON DC
RUEILB/NCTC WASHINGTON DC
C O N F I D E N T I A L CHENNAI 000398
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/08/2018
TAGS: ASEC KISL PGOV PTER IN
SUBJECT: STATE FAILS TO NOTIFY CONSULATE OF SPECIFIC TERRORIST THREAT
Classified by Acting Principal Officer Frederick J. Kaplan for reasons 1.4(b) and (d)
1. (C) Summary: Two contacts casually mentioned to us that the government of Tamil Nadu had recently increased security
due to a ""specific threat"" against the Consulate. The Consulate received no advance notification of the threat; we
only came to know due to the two informal after-the-fact references to the information. This lack of communication is
disturbing, especially in light of the fact that the Regional Security Office (RSO) was in close contact with police
officials to make security arrangements for a high-profile event being held at a five star hotel in Chennai. We are
following up with the authorities to learn more about the threat and to ensure that future threats to the Consulate are
communicated to us promptly. End Summary
2. (C) In the late afternoon of December 6, Sylendra Babu, Tamil Nadu Inspector General of Police (Special Task Force),
casually mentioned that the state police had increased security at the Consulate due to specific threats the government
had received. The discussion came at a chance encounter at a U.S.-sponsored workshop on human trafficking where Babu was
making a presentation. Babu said that on December 4 or 5 the state police received a ""specific threat"" of an attack
against the Consulate to coincide with the anniversary of the destruction of the Babri mosque. Babu said the police had
taken additional precautionary measures, citing the posting of armed officers on the overpass adjacent to the Consulate
(known as Gemini flyover) as an example of the security enhancements. He was unwilling to provide further details about
the threat. (Note: The anniversary of the Babri mosque incident is considered a likely date for terrorist attacks, which
meant local security forces were already at a heightened stage of alert. End note.)
3. (C) On December 8 consulate officers met with Jothi Jagarajan, Secretary - Public and Rehabilitation, Government of
Tamil Nadu, to discuss security issues in the wake of the November 26 terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Jagarajan's portfolio
includes maintenance of law and order and protection of diplomatic facilities. When we explained the purpose of our
visit Jagarajan off-handedly mentioned that on December 4 the state government had received a ""specific threat""
against the Consulate. He said it came in the form of ""intercepts"" the government believed originated from the state
of Assam.
4. (C) Comment: Our police intelligence interlocutors had previously assured us that they would advise us of any
specific threats against the Consulate. Instead, we find ourselves learning about a specific threat that they deemed
credible enough to prompt additional precautionary measures after the fact. Worse yet, despite ample opportunities for
the police to tell us in our frequent liaison with them in the wake of the Mumbai attacks, we only came to know about
the threat in the course of small talk and casual banter. We plan to follow-up with the authorities to learn more about
the threat and to ensure that future threats to the Consulate are communicated to us promptly. End comment.
KAPLAN