According to the latest news, 190 people were killed in the 11 July Mumbai bomb blasts. A self claimed spokesman of the Lashkar-e-Toiba has denied its role, but various factors suggest otherwise. Why did they do it? What are their reasons for this attack?

At least three factors point to the Lashkar. Firstly, it is the only jihadi organization with an established enough network to carry out such an attack. Other militant organizations fighting in Kashmir, like the Hizbul Mujahideen, have failed or been uninterested in establishing a network outside J&K. For various reasons, Jaish-e-Mohammad has also not succeeded in this regard. There have also been reports linking LeT with the SIMI in India; each exploiting the other is a possibility. This local support that sustains the LeT network is essential for logistics. Secondly, Lashkar is one of the few jihadi organizations that has openly supported the demise of a 'Hindu' India. For organizations like the Hizbul, Kashmir is the end of its operational area. Thirdly, Lashkar is the only jihadi organization that has exploited Dawood Ibrahim's criminal network. The ISI has played an important role in providing this link. These three factors indicate the involvement of Lashkar.

Why should the Lashkar launch such an attack? Its primary objective is to destabilize India; jihad in Kashmir is only a strategy to achieve this objective. Numerous statements in this regard have been published by its chief, Hafiz Saeed, on the Lashkar website and elsewhere. Lashkar aims to achieve this objective by creating communal disharmony at the national level. Some of its recent attacks, in terms of location and timing, sought to disrupt communal amity. Ayodhya and Varanasi were carefully chosen for their religious significance to the Hindu majority. The attack on the Ram temple complex in Ayodhya ,in July 2005, was Lashkar's most sinister plan and the country was fortunate that the suicide bomber was killed by the CRPF jawan's first bullet . Had the suicide bomber succeeded in blowing up the sanctum sanctorum, India's history could have been different today. In March 2006, Varanasi, another holy town for the Hindus, was targeted for the same reasons. In October 2005, just days before one of the most important Hindu festivals - Diwali, New Delhi witnessed attacks at a local market and in a bus.

Mumbai, the economic capital of India, was chosen once again because it is communally sensitive. In fact, this is not the first time that Mumbai has been targeted. Since 2002, there have been at least five terrorist attacks, with four of them in or close to the rail network in Mumbai. Ever since the attack on the Babri mosque by the Hindu Right in 1991, followed by the 1993 bomb blasts in Mumbai, the city has become communally sensitive. The communal riots in Gujarat only increased the sensitivity of Mumbai. If Mumbai burns due to communal violence, it would be a huge disaster for India's social, political and economic security. That is precisely the aim of the Lashkar.

The second reason for the Mumbai attack is related to the Indo-Pak peace process. Lashkar has publicly voiced its disapproval on the subject. The Indian government has resisted such pressures and kept the peace process on track, but the Lashkar has continuously tried to derail it. Since the process started there have been sporadic attacks. The Mumbai attacks did not take place in a vacuum. Earlier in June 2006, an attack targeted the headquarters of the RSS in Nagpur, but was successfully thwarted when the security forces killed three militants. Two days before the present Mumbai attack, the statue of Meenatai, wife of Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray, was desecrated, leading to a violent reaction from the Shiv Sainiks. The same day, there were six bomb attacks in Srinagar. Are these isolated events or do they bear a connection? Is there a larger strategy to provoke the Hindu Right to react against the Muslim community, and the Congress government to call off the peace process? This seems likely.

Finally, is Pakistan involved in this attack? Is it possible that such an attack, on a sensitive Indian city, could have occurred without the knowledge of the military regime and the intelligence agencies, led by the ISI? What does it imply if this attack was officially sanctioned? Either there is a divide in the corridors of power in Pakistan and one section does not want the peace process to proceed or the section that is pursuing the peace process wants to pressurize India to move faster - 'if you don't move faster, see what we are capable of .' Either way, this does not bode well for the peace process. The Indian government has to chalk out a more effective strategy to meet the militant threat from within India along with the external threat from Pakistan.