Terrorism is no stranger to India where sectarian violence has killed about 3,600 people in the last four years alone. But Wednesday?s attacks in an upscale quarter of Mumbai, a city that saw 187 deaths in a series of bombings in July 2006, scaled new heights of brazenness and shock value. If it was the handiwork of al-Qaeda, as some terrorism experts suspect, it would be their third most successful operation in terms of casualties, next only to the World Trade Center attacks in 2001 and the Bali bombing of 2002.

The raid on Mumbai started with 17 young terrorists being dropped at sea and taking a speedboat to India?s business capital. As soon as they landed, they commandeered some vehicles and proceeded to their targets, shooting at people along the way. Within minutes, they attacked 10 different establishments, including two hospitals, a train station and a classy restaurant, occupied two five-star hotels and a Jewish center and held scores of people hostage. Mumbai?s night of terror stretched has stretched into days, and as of this writing, 130 people lay dead and more than 300 wounded.

A group calling itself Deccan Mujahideen claimed credit for the well-coordinated attack, but that was the first time Indian authorities heard of the group. Neither is it clear what the group?s grievances are or what it is fighting for, although one terrorist was said to have told an Indian TV station that they were Indians and that they were retaliating for the bad treatment of Muslims.

All these questions should be cleared in due time, since Indian authorities have in their custody nine of the attackers. In the meantime, the least that Indian officials should do is keep their suspicions to themselves. No useful purpose is served by pointing prematurely and without proof an accusing finger at Pakistan even if it is India?s traditional foe.

But that is what some of India?s top officials have been doing almost as soon as the first shots were fired in Mumbai. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the group that launched the attack was ?based outside the country,? a description commonly interpreted to mean Pakistan. He warned ?our neighbors that the use of their territory for launching attacks on us will not be tolerated, and that there would be a cost if suitable measures are not taken by them.? The top military official leading the rescue of hostages went further and directly accused Pakistan of involvement in the attacks, a charge that Pakistan vigorously denied. And the Indian media have joined in with one newspaper saying some of the terrorists were members of Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based group fighting Indian rule in Kashmir.

Of course, all these suspicions or accusations might be validated by later investigations. But absent any clear proof of Pakistan?s involvement, it seems the height of irresponsibility to blame that country right away, given the grief and anger Indians must be feeling over the carnage that happened in one of its major cities. At the very least, incendiary statements like that of their prime minister could spark a new round of reprisals against India?s Muslim minority by Hindu fanatics. At worst, it could erupt into a new war between the two countries, which both boast of being in possession of nuclear bombs. And India surely wants neither.

Unless it can be shown that Pakistan?s government is involved, India might stand a better chance of winning the war against terrorists by seeking the cooperation of its neighbor.