In the sense that India ranks alongside Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan for the frequency (and deadliness) of its terrorist attacks, the series of shootings and bombings in India's financial capital, Mumbai, yesterday was not unexpected. What was surprising was that the gunmen targeted hotels and restaurants frequented by foreign tourists, and appeared to single out Britons and Americans for execution. The terrorists also struck the city's railway station and a hospital, killing at least 80 and injuring probably about 300 though the final death toll could rise, given that some of the gunmen are reportedly holed up at the Taj Mahal Palace and the Oberoi Trident hotels after having seized dozens of hostages.
India, a vast and ethnically diverse country of more than a billion people, has had to contend with terrorism since independence in 1947. Regional groups with separatist ambitions have been behind most of the attacks, but ethnic tensions between the country's Muslim and Sikh minorities and Hindu majority have also contributed. India's politicians and governments (both state and federal) have proved all too willing to fan religious and ethnic tensions, exacerbating the sense of alienation and discrimination felt by the country's minorities and, of course, providing extremist organisations with a very effective tool for recruitment.
India's long history of militant extremism ought to have enabled it to build a strong counterterrorism capability, but in reality its security agencies continue to be largely ineffectual. Inter-service rivalry, red tape and political interference are usually the reasons cited for India's dismal counterterrorism record. In some case, a high tolerance for ''collateral damage'' among certain agencies has actually undermined that effort and alienated disaffected minorities even further. And, in a variation on the old foreign policy doctrine that ''the enemy of my enemy is my friend'', Pakistan has been happy to support militant Islamist groups and Kashmiri separatists and offer them bases within its borders.
An organisation calling itself the Deccan Mujahideen has claimed responsibility for the Mumbai attacks. The fact that it was previously unknown suggests it may be an affiliate or offshoot of Indian Mujahideen, a group that is itself an offshoot of the banned Students Islamic Movement of India, or SIMI. Indian Mujahideen claims to have been behind the bombings that took place in Delhi in September, as well as a number of other bombings in Bangalore, Jaipur and Ahmedabad.
After the well-planned Delhi bombings (which killed 30 people and injured more than 100), Indian Mujahideen sent an email to authorities warning that it would target Mumbai next and accusing the city's anti-terrorism squad of harassing Muslims. Yesterday's message from the Deccan Mujahideen echoed September's email, and the precise, well-planned nature of the attacks appears to bear the hallmarks of an Indian Mujahideen operation.
That the chief of the city's anti-terrorism squad was among those killed suggests it is a formidable organisation. In fact, Indian intelligence now says it believes the Indian Mujahideen is not a single terrorist group but a loose network of Islamist groups united by ideological affiliation and common cause. These include SIMI, a group of men from the state of Uttar Pradesh with links to the Harakat ul-Jihad-i-Islami (an extremist militant group which fought with the Taliban in Afghanistan and has since shifted its focus to Pakistani-occupied Kashmir) and the jihadist-linked crime cartel of jailed Indian gangster Aftab Ansari.
If Deccan Mujahideen and Indian Mujahideen are one and the same group as terrorism analyst Rohan Gunaratna has already asserted, then the investigation into the Mumbai attacks is likely to centre on Abdul Subhan Qureshi, the No1 suspect in the Delhi bombings. Also known as Tauqir Bilal and Qasim, Qureshi first came to police attention for his suspected involvement in a series of Mumbai train bombings back in July 2006 that killed more than 200 people. Qureshi's ability to stay one step ahead of the law has led to his being dubbed India's Osama bin Laden.
But why, having previously concentrated its attacks on Indian nationals, would Indian Mujahideen suddenly switch to targeting foreigners, specifically Americans and Britons? The answer is not immediately obvious. One explanation could be that the group was stung when Muslims staged a protest in New Delhi blaming SIMI for the Delhi blasts and demanded that Pakistan refrain from involvement in terrorism
On Sunday, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh described the communist Naxalite insurgency ''as the most serious internal security threat'' facing India today. That assessment may now have to change. Singh could have added that, unless India's politicians better address the grievances of their minorities, militant organisations like SIMI and Indian Mujahideen will continue to flourish.