The Laskhar-e-Toiba and the Students Islamic Movement of India are suspected of masterminding the train blasts in Mumbai on July 11. Analysts have argued that the attacks hoped to derail the ongoing Indo-Pak peace process and instigate communal discord and, seen on a macro level, were designed to destabilize India. The question is: Do these terrorist attacks achieve these objectives, as gauged by public reaction?

In the past thirteen years Mumbai has survived six major attacks: serial blasts on 12 March 1993, 2 blasts at Ghatkopar on 2 December 2002 and four days later, a blast at Mumbai Central Station, a blast on 27 January 2003 at Ville Parle and another in the same year at Mulund Railway Station. 2003 also witnessed twin blasts on August 25 at the Gateway of India and Zaveri bazaar. The July 11 blasts were the seventh in this series. None of these attacks have been memorialized with an annual moment of silence or even a plaque. Within three hours of the recent blasts, a skeletal suburban rail service started and by 10 am the next morning normal rail services had resumed. It was business as usual with the stations crowded with millions of people. Life carried on and politicians and journalists alike applauded the courageous resilience of Mumbaikars. Even the Sensex gained 315 points and the Laughter Club of Mumbai met again at the Gateway of India the morning after the blasts.

Outside Mumbai, on March 7 this year, two blasts occurred in Varanasi, leading to a daylong bandh and a peace march led by Youth Congress workers to promote communal harmony. In Madhya Pradesh, a two minute silence was observed and the assembly adjourned for five minutes. By the next day, however, Varanasi was back to life, with a steady stream of devotees at the Sankat Mochan Temple - the site of one of the blasts. In the national newspapers the story soon became secondary to the controversy regarding MP Jaya Bachan's holding an office for profit. On 30 October 2005, two blasts occurred at crowded shopping areas in Paharganj and Sarojini Nagar in New Delhi, a few days before Diwali. Despite more than 50 people having died, shops in these markets opened the next morning. Reports of Delhi's resilience read -"Delhi has decided to keep its skies lit bright this Diwali to ensure that nothing mars the festival spirit of the season" and, by November 1, news about these blasts had moved to the regional news pages of a number of national newspapers.

On 7 July 2005 terror struck Britain as 3 bombs exploded in three different London Underground trains and another in a bus. A year later, on July 7, London observed two minutes of silence with the entire city coming to a standstill, including public transport. Thousands of people gathered to pay condolences to the victims of these attacks. National newspapers carried a section marking their anniversary, including interviews with people whose lives had changed after the blasts. At the time of the blasts, the tube was shut down and markets plummeted as life came to a standstill in a public demonstration of grief. Plaques were unveiled at the tube stations where the bombs had exploded and memorial services were held at each blast site.

What does this contrast between the way people in India and the UK responded to terrorist attacks suggest, discounting the fact that the London blasts were the largest terrorist attack in Britain? India has been desensitized to an extent because of a previous history of such attacks, but also because of the daily economic struggle that prevents life from coming to a standstill. However, it also suggests that terrorist attacks no longer create terror. The Indian people are neither shaken nor scared, and even security does not remain tightened for more than two days. There is no public paranoia, and no indication of serious security measures being taken. And, while the reaction is muted - characterized by unanimous condemnation - the public response would suggest that there can be no accommodation of terrorist demands. It is important to note that there have been no incidents of communal violence - clearly indicating a public realization that these attacks were not only communally motivated by forces within the country but also politically motivated by external interests. While the attacks may derail the peace process between India and Pakistan, it is unlikely that the Indian government will make any concessions on the basis of these attacks. India is not 'destabilized'. It seems a futile act by the terrorists, as nothing was gained by them. The only destabilizing effect they have unleashed, sadly, is the personal trauma privately borne by the families of the victims.