The savage terrorist attacks in Mumbai can only be described as an assault on India's pluralism and its efforts to improve ties with Pakistan. Whoever was behind the killings wanted Muslims and Hindus to turn on each other, increased sectarian violence and tension, an overreaction by the Indian government and deterioration in India-Pakistan relations at a time when a thaw in ties between these two nuclear-armed states looked possible.
Mumbai, a cosmopolitan city which is India's financial capital, is no stranger to violence. Major terrorist attacks took place in 1993, 2003 and 2006 leaving hundreds of people dead. This time the attacks were more sophisticated, and foreigners, especially Americans, British and Israelis, were singled out by well-trained hostage-takers. It is not clear whether Al-Qaeda was directly behind the atrocities, although many analysts believe the terrorists could well have been inspired by the organisation's ideology and tactics.
A group calling itself the Deccan Mujahideen, about which hardly anything is known, initially claimed responsibility for the attacks, but India immediately pointed the finger at Pakistan, specifically at the Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based Kashmiri jihadi group which has be blamed for hundreds of attacks in the region since 1991. This militant group is believed to have had extensive links with Pakistan's security services in the past, but the organisation is now banned and it is unclear to what extent these ties still exist.
The only surviving terrorist of the Mumbai attacks is in police custody and the Indian police have said he is "certainly" from Pakistan. This has been denied by Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, who said on American television: "We have not been given any tangible proof to say that he is definitely a Pakistani. I very much doubt that he's a Pakistani."
However, the Indian government has made it clear it expects Islamabad to co-operate with investigations into the Mumbai attacks and has also asked Pakistan to hand over 20 of its most feared militants. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on a visit to India, also called on Pakistan to "co-operate fully and transparently" with the investigations.
It is certainly in Pakistan's interest to co-operate fully on this matter. Pakistan is, after all, also a victim of terrorism. President Zardari's wife, Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated last year; in September jihadis destroyed the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad; and the Pakistani army has long been fighting Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants on the Afghan border. Nevertheless, it would seem that the Pakistani government needs to make more of an effort to control its military and intelligence service and their alleged links with jihadis and Muslim militants.
Most observers do not believe the Pakistani government was behind the Mumbai attacks, but it is generally believed that some links between rogue elements in the country's security services and militant organisations in Kashmir and Afghanistan still exist. President Zardari has already curbed the activities of the country's military intelligence organisation, which is viewed by great suspicion by New Delhi, and it is important that this clampdown continues.
It is no coincidence that the Mumbai attacks came so soon after Zardari made some of the strongest overtures to India in an attempt to end their 61-year-old antagonism, which saw the countries go to war three times over Kashmir. Zardari offered to withdraw Pakistan's first-strike nuclear threat, sign a regional nuclear non-proliferation treaty and enter into an EU-style economic zone with India. Those responsible for the Mumbai outrage certainly have no interest in seeing detente between these two countries.
It would be tempting for Indian Prime Minister Mammohan Singh to dismiss these offers in light of the terrorist attacks, especially with a general election being held next year, but he shouldn't. What is needed now is a statesmanlike-response by Singh aimed at diffusing tensions as well as further overtures by Zardari.
The worst thing that could happen would be for extremist elements in both countries to get the upper hand, leading to a war of words between these nuclear armed states and greater sectarian tension between Hindus and Muslims.
The fact that India has 150 million Muslims in a predominantly Hindu population can never be overlooked. With Al-Qaeda operations on the decline in Muslim countries such as Iraq and Indonesia, India, with a large Muslim minority is the perfect place for Al-Qaeda inspired jihad.
The fact that some Muslims in India feel marginalised and have not benefited from the country's rapid economic growth should also not be ignored, and this is obviously what the extremists like to exploit. Knee-jerk reactions against Muslims in India in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks must be avoided at all costs. Just imagine the consequences of antagonising 150 million Muslims - a perfect opportunity to radicalise Muslim public opinion and encourage support for extremists.
What is needed now is level-headedness in both India and Pakistan, continued co-operation between the two countries and a strong diplomatic effort by the incoming Obama administration in the US aimed at settling the disputes between these two very important regional players.