The news from Mumbai is grim: five hostages have been killed at Nariman House, the Chabad center in the city, and battles continue at the Taj Hotel.

At the moment, the circumstances surrounding the deaths of the hostages, including Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and members of his family, are unclear. No information has surfaced as to whether they were executed by the terrorists or whether they were killed in the crossfire as Indian commandos stormed the building.

However, as Yaakov Katz reports, some Israeli officials are unhappy with the way the Indian security forces have handled the situation:

The Israeli officials said that Indian counter-terrorist forces were well trained but failed to gather sufficient intelligence before engaging the terrorists.

“In hostage situations, the first thing the forces are supposed to do is assemble at the scene and begin collecting intelligence,” said a former official in the Shin Bet’s security unit. “In this case, it appears that the forces showed up at the scene and immediately began exchanging fire with the terrorists instead of first taking control of the area.”

Are there any broader conclusions that can be reached concerning this horrendous episode? It’s too early for definitive statements, but some interesting perspectives are coming out. In an interview with Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria makes this point:

I think one of the misconceptions we’re seeing so far is the assumption that these attacks were aimed primarily at foreigners. Look at their targets. The two hotels they attacked—the Taj and the Oberoi—are old, iconic Indian hotels. It used to be true that these places were affordable only by Westerners. But this is no longer true, and it’s one of the big changes over the last ten years in India. The five-star hotels today are filled with Indians. Businessmen, wedding receptions, parties…these are real meeting places now, and even those who cannot afford to stay there often pass through the lobby.

Zakaria goes on to point out that there are a range of western-owned hotels in Mumbai - like the Marriott, whose branch in Islamabad was the site of a ghastly truck bombing in September - concluding that it’s significant they were spared.

Perhaps the readiness on the part of the terrorists to attack Indian-owned targets demonstrates that Islamist terrorism doesn’t distinguish between nationality or religious affiliation in quite the manner that some western rationalizers would have us believe. True, Americans, British and Jews (whether Israeli or not) are all prime targets, as the Mumbai assaults have shown with terrifying clarity, but that doesn’t spare those who are regarded as colluding with them. And if terrorist attacks from Iraq to Pakistan to Indonesia to Afghanistan tell us anything, it’s that specifically Muslim deaths - whether intentionally or as collateral damage - are no barrier to carrying out these operations.