Indian commandos stormed a luxury hotel and a Jewish center in Mumbai yesterday, killing two of the militants who attacked 10 sites in India’s financial capital. As of yesterday afternoon the attacks had left 143 people dead, including some of the foreigners who were taken hostage at the plush Oberoi and Taj Mahal hotels. Indian officials pinned the blame on “external forces” — the phrase they typically use when they suspect Pakistani involvement in violent attacks. Islamabad, as it has often done in the past, denied the accusation.
The two countries, both with nuclear capability, have a long-running conflict over Kashmir. In July 2006 India also blamed Pakistani militants for a series of bombings also in Mumbai, which left 187 dead. The latest attacks starting Wednesday night were particularly daring, with the gunmen striking at crowded public places including hospitals, a restaurant frequented by tourists and a railroad terminal. The attacks were claimed by a previously unknown group called the Deccan Mujahideen, referring to a southern Indian region where Muslim kings used to reign.
The Mumbai siege, which until early last night was not yet over, should remind Philippine security officials that the potential for terrorist attacks is always present in countries where there is armed conflict. The Philippines has had its share of deadly terrorist violence, with one — the bombing of a SuperFerry vessel near the mouth of Manila Bay, killing over 100. That attack was claimed by the Abu Sayyaf, working in tandem with bombers of the Southeast Asian terror cell Jemaah Islamiyah.
Though both JI and the Abu Sayyaf have been weakened in recent years by the arrest of many of their top militants, security officials cannot afford to let down their guard. Terrorists know the virtue of patience, and they strike when security forces are lulled into complacency. Yesterday civilians in India were lamenting the failure of state intelligence that helped make the Mumbai attacks possible. That is a lament Philippine security officials would not want to hear.