Mumbai's Crisis.(International Edition; LETTERS)(Letter to the editor)

The Dec. 8 cover package on the Mumbai tragedy riveted readers. "Fareed Zakaria's reactions were powerful given his personal and familial connections to the Taj Mahal Hotel," one said. And a former Indian security official cited "a callous bureaucracy" that cares more about politics than national security.

India's Vulnerability to Terror

The Mumbai blasts have unmasked the frailty of the Indian government in combating this growing malaise of sporadic terrorist attacks ("This Fire Needs to Be Put Out," Dec. 8). While exposing the impotency of the nation's internal security and governance, the Mumbai blasts have revealed the courage of the Mumbai police force, the Indian army and the media who carried out their responsibilities relentlessly in the face of enduring peril. All the Indian government seems to be doing after such attacks is to condemn the dastardly acts and instantly go into hibernation. Forums and cells created to combat terrorism work on cracking past cases and do little or nothing to prevent such events recurring. It remains to be seen if the horrific Mumbai attacks will jolt the Indian government to act sternly and keep terrorism at bay. One hopes that something constructive comes out of Mumbai's humiliation in India.

K. Chidanand Kumar

Bangalore, India

Sumit Ganguly's Dec. 8 analysis in "Delhi's Three Fatal Flaws" is not entirely correct. It is not that India did not try to convince the world that the country was a victim of terror; it is that the West, in spite of overwhelming evidence, refused to be convinced until 9/11--that is until it also became a victim of terror. India's banes are weak laws, a colonial police, callous bureaucracy and leadership that gives precedence to political considerations over issues affecting national security.

Prakash Singh