The ugly indiscriminate nature of international terrorism was amply illustrated in the attacks on Mumbai which left 120 people dead and three times that number injured.

While it has yet to be established exactly what grouping was behind the well co-ordinated gun attacks in the Indian financial capital, there appears to be evidence that they came from outside the country.

The delicate nature of relationships with neighbouring Pakistan means that the Indian authorities have to tread carefully before pointing the finger of blame at any particular terrorist organisation.

The scale and audacity of the attacks suggested to some experts that the gunmen must have had links to al Qaeda. This theory was reinforced by reports that in some instances the terrorists tried to identify British and US tourists among hostages held in two of the city’s most prestigious hotels. However, other analysts point out that al Qaeda extremists are more prone to using car bombs to cause indiscriminate slaughter as in another attack in the city in 2006.

What is beyond dispute is that the attacks were designed to cause large scale loss of life and also a huge dent in the reputation of India. The sub-continent is one of the fastest growing economies in the world and Mumbai is its financial centre. The terrorists undoubtedly hope that this latest slaughter will discourage investors, harming India’s economic growth and weakening its links with the west.

But it was, above all, an attack on the ordinary citizens of Mumbai. They formed the vast bulk of the dead and injured and the terrorists may also be hoping to spark some inter-sect violence in the country

or damage the fragile diplomatic relationship with Pakistan. On at least one previous occasions the two countries almost went to war after a terrorist attack blamed on a group alleged to have links with Pakistan’s intelligence services.

Ever since President Bush launched his war on terror following 9/11, there have been frequent examples of the mass killings favoured by international extremist groups. Many of them are based or controlled from the Middle East or the region bounded by India, Pakistan and Afghanistan and, no matter how many reversals they suffer, they always return to perpetrate their atrocities.

There is hope that the election of Barack Obama may restore some of America’s reputation throughout the world and that his stated preference for diplomacy rather than aggression can line up new allies in the fight against international terrorism. However, as his inauguration as President of the USA draws closer, there is concern that the terrorists will attempt to mount another spectacular attack, partly to test the mettle of the new leader and partly to restate their determination to continue to spread terror throughout the world.

It is a sad fact of modern life that few countries of the world remain untouched by violence. Even in Northern Ireland, where a political solution has been found to three decades of conflict, there remains a threat from dissident republicans unwilling to accept the new order. Their capacity and appetite for mayhem, fortunately, is much less than the terrorists behind the Mumbai massacre, but all feed off the same fanaticism and inhumanity.