1.

6 Casualties
Statistics on the number of deaths and injuries during the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai in 2008:

1. Taj Mahal Palace & Tower Hotel:

• Deaths: At least 31 people were killed in the hotel.
• Injuries: Many others were injured in the attack on this iconic hotel.
2. Oberoi Trident Hotel:
• Deaths: Approximately 32 people lost their lives in the Oberoi Trident Hotel.
• Injuries: Several people sustained injuries during the attack on this hotel.
3. Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus (CST):
• Deaths: At least 58 people were killed in the CST railway station attack.
• Injuries: Numerous passengers and commuters were injured.
4. Nariman House (Chabad House):
• Deaths: Six people, including Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and his wife Rivka, were
killed in the attack on Nariman House.
• Injuries: There were no reports of injuries in this speci c location.
5. Other locations:
• Deaths: Additional casualties occurred at various other locations across the city,
bringing the total death toll to approximately 166 people.
• Injuries: Many more people were injured in di erent parts of Mumbai as a result of
the attacks, with estimates exceeding 300 injuries.

Victims

1. Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and Rivka Holtzberg: They were the Jewish couple who ran the
Nariman House (Chabad House) in Mumbai. The couple, originally from Israel, were dedicated to
helping Jewish travelers and locals. They were among the victims in the Nariman House attack,
leaving behind a young son who miraculously survived.

2. Hemant Karkare: He was the Chief of the Mumbai Anti-Terrorist Squad (ATS) and a senior
police o cer. Karkare was instrumental in confronting the terrorists at CST and was killed in
action. He is remembered for his bravery in the line of duty.

3. Ashok Kamte: Another senior police o cer, Ashok Kamte, was the Additional
Commissioner of Police in Mumbai. He also confronted the terrorists at CST and was killed in the
line of duty.

4. Sandeep Unnikrishnan: A major in the Indian Army, he led the operation to neutralize the
terrorists at the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel. Tragically, he lost his life in the operation but is
remembered for his courage and sacri ce

1.7 Response and Operations

The response to the 26/11 attacks led to signi cant changes in India's security and
counterterrorism policies, with a focus on intelligence sharing, coastal security, and enhancing the
capabilities of security forces. It also highlighted the need for better preparedness in the face of
such threats.

1. Mumbai Police: The local police were the rst responders to the attacks. They faced signi cant
challenges in handling a situation of this magnitude. Their initial response was to secure the
a ected areas and evacuate civilians.

2. National Security Guard (NSG): The Indian government deployed NSG commandos to handle
the terrorists. NSG is a special forces unit trained to respond to terrorist incidents. They played a
crucial role in neutralizing the terrorists and ending the siege.
ff
ffi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
ff
fi
fi
3. Indian Army: The Indian Army also provided support in the form of commando units and
logistics. They helped secure various locations and collaborated with other security forces.

4. Marine Commandos (Marcos): The Indian Navy's elite special forces, known as Marcos,
conducted operations at the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel and other coastal areas to neutralize the
terrorists.

5. Intelligence Agencies: India's intelligence agencies, including the Research and Analysis Wing
(RAW) and the Intelligence Bureau (IB), worked to gather information and assist in the response.

6. Political Response: The Indian government and political leaders condemned the attacks and
sought international support. There were also diplomatic e orts to isolate Pakistan, where the
attackers were believed to have originated.

7. Public Support: The attacks garnered widespread public support for the security forces and
calls for improved counterterrorism measures.

NSG involvement:

The National Security Guard (NSG) played a crucial role in responding to the 2008 Mumbai
attacks (26/11)

1. Deployment: The NSG is India's premier counter-terrorism and special forces unit. In response
to the 26/11 attacks, NSG commandos were swiftly deployed to Mumbai. The primary NSG base,
known as the "Black Cats," is located in Manesar, Haryana. They were own to Mumbai via
military aircraft.

2. Operations: NSG commandos were involved in various operations during the attacks. They
conducted counter-terrorism missions at several key locations, including the Taj Mahal Palace
Hotel, Oberoi Trident Hotel, Nariman House (a Jewish community center), and Chhatrapati Shivaji
Terminus (formerly Victoria Terminus).

3. Neutralization of Terrorists: NSG commandos engaged with the terrorists, aiming to neutralize
them and rescue hostages. Their expertise in handling hostage situations and urban combat was
critical in minimizing casualties and ending the siege.

4. Evacuation and Rescue: NSG commandos were involved in the evacuation of trapped civilians
and ensuring the safety of hostages. They carefully cleared areas and buildings to eliminate
threats.

5. Reestablishing Security: After the terrorists were neutralized and the situation brought under
control, NSG commandos played a role in restoring security in the a ected areas.

6. International Cooperation: The NSG collaborated with other Indian security forces, including the
Mumbai Police, the Indian Army, and the Marine Commandos (Marcos), as well as intelligence
agencies. Their collective e orts were crucial in responding e ectively to the attacks.

7. Ongoing Vigilance: The NSG continued to maintain a high state of alert and readiness during
and after the attacks to prevent any further incidents.

The NSG's involvement in the 26/11 attacks showcased their professionalism, training, and
commitment to national security. It also underscored the need for a specialized force like the NSG
to handle such high-risk situations, and it led to increased focus on enhancing the capabilities of
India's counter-terrorism forces and improving response mechanisms.

1.8 International Response

The international community expressed condemnation, solidarity, and support in various ways:
ff
ff
ff
ff
fl
 1. Global Condemnation: Nations from around the world issued statements
condemning the attacks and expressing their sympathies to the victims and their families.
2. Security Concerns: The attacks raised concerns about the global security situation,
highlighting the need for greater cooperation in the ght against terrorism.
3. Diplomatic E orts: India conducted diplomatic e orts to isolate Pakistan, as it was
believed that the attackers had originated from there. Tensions between India and Pakistan rose,
with increased international attention on their strained relationship.
4. Assistance O ers: Several countries, including the United States, Israel, and the
United Kingdom, o ered assistance to India in the form of intelligence sharing and
counterterrorism support. The U.S. Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, visited India in the
aftermath of the attacks to express solidarity and o er support.
5. UN Security Council: The United Nations Security Council issued a statement
condemning the attacks and urging all countries to cooperate with India in bringing the
perpetrators to justice. The attacks also led to discussions on counterterrorism measures at the
international level.
6. Increased Maritime Security: The attacks exposed vulnerabilities in maritime
security. As a result, there was a renewed focus on improving maritime security, especially in the
Indian Ocean region.
7. Global Anti-Terrorism Cooperation: The international community recognized the
need for stronger cooperation in the ght against terrorism. This event contributed to discussions
on international counterterrorism e orts and the sharing of best practices.
8. Public Demonstrations: In various countries, people held candlelight vigils and
demonstrations in solidarity with the victims of the attacks and to express their support for India.

O ers of assistance from various countries :

1. United States: The United States was among the rst countries to o er assistance. The
U.S. government expressed its condolences and o ered to help in any way possible. U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visited India to show support and discuss counterterrorism
cooperation.
2. United Kingdom: The UK o ered assistance, including expertise in handling
terrorist incidents and forensic analysis.
3. Israel: Israel o ered intelligence and counterterrorism support, as some of the
targets of the attacks, like the Nariman House (Chabad House), had connections to the Jewish
community.
4. France: France expressed solidarity with India and o ered assistance in any form
necessary.
5. Germany: The German government o ered its support to India in the wake of the
attacks.
6. Russia: Russia also expressed its condolences and readiness to assist India in
combating terrorism.
7. Australia: The Australian government o ered assistance and expressed its
condemnation of the attacks.

1.9 Diplomatic Tensions

Discussion of the aftermath and diplomatic relations between India and Pakistan

1. **Accusations against Pakistan**: India accused Pakistan of being involved in or indirectly

supporting the attackers, as many of them were found to have Pakistani connections. India
claimed that the attackers had been trained in Pakistan and alleged that there were links between
the attackers and elements within the Pakistani intelligence and military establishment.

2. **Diplomatic Tensions**: The accusations and mounting evidence created tensions between the
two countries. India demanded that Pakistan take action against the individuals and groups
responsible for the attacks.

3. **International Pressure**: The international community, including the United States, called on
Pakistan to cooperate with India's investigation and to take action against the perpetrators. There
ff
ff
ff
ff
ff
ff
fi
ff
ff
ff
fi
ff
ff
fi
ff
ff
ff
 were concerns that rising tensions between India and Pakistan could escalate into a larger
con ict.

4. **Pakistan's Response**: Pakistan initially denied any involvement in the attacks but later
acknowledged that the attacks were partly planned on its soil. Pakistan arrested several
individuals in connection with the attacks and initiated a trial.

5. **Resumption of Dialogue**: In the years following the attacks, both countries faced domestic
and international pressure to resume diplomatic dialogue. There were intermittent e orts to
improve relations and cooperation on various issues, including counterterrorism.

6. **Slow Progress**: Progress in the bilateral relationship was slow and faced many obstacles.
The trial of the accused in Pakistan faced delays, and there were allegations of insu cient action
against terrorist groups operating from within Pakistan.

7. **Continued Tensions**: Despite attempts to improve relations, India and Pakistan continued to
experience periodic escalations of tension, with events like the 2016 Uri attack and the 2019
Pulwama attack further straining relations.

1.10 Ajmal khasab

Ajmal Kasab was the lone surviving attacker from the 2008 Mumbai attacks, and his capture, trial,
and eventual execution were signi cant aspects of the aftermath of the attacks:

**Capture**:
- Ajmal Kasab was captured on the night of November 26, 2008, during the attacks in Mumbai.
- He and his accomplice, Ismail Khan, were involved in a shootout with the police at Girgaum
Chowpatty.
- Kasab was shot in the hand, captured alive, and taken into custody.

**Trial**:
- Kasab's trial took place in India, and he was charged with numerous o enses, including murder,
waging war against India, and criminal conspiracy.
- The trial was held in a special court, and Kasab was represented by legal counsel.
- During the trial, Kasab initially pleaded not guilty but later changed his plea, admitting to his role
in the attacks.
- The trial proceedings were closely watched, and Kasab's confession played a signi cant role in
establishing his involvement in the attacks.

**Verdict and Sentencing**:

- On May 3, 2010, Kasab was found guilty on multiple charges.
- On May 6, 2010, he was sentenced to death by hanging.
- His conviction and sentencing were widely covered in the media, and it was seen as a signi cant
development in bringing the perpetrators of the 26/11 attacks to justice.

**Execution**:
- Ajmal Kasab's execution took place on November 21, 2012, after his appeal for clemency was
rejected by the President of India.
- His execution was carried out at Yerwada Central Jail in Pune, Maharashtra.
- The Indian government's decision to carry out the death penalty was seen as a response to the
gravity of the 26/11 attacks.

1.11 Impact and Reforms**

The 2008 Mumbai attacks (26/11) had a profound impact on Indian security policies and led to
several key changes and reforms in the country's security apparatus:
fl
fi
ff
ff
ffi
fi
fi
 1. **Counterterrorism Response**: The attacks exposed the need for a more coordinated and
e ective counterterrorism response. India initiated steps to improve inter-agency cooperation and
coordination among intelligence agencies, law enforcement, and the armed forces.

2. **National Investigative Agency (NIA)**: In the aftermath of the attacks, India established the
NIA, a federal agency dedicated to investigating and prosecuting terrorism-related cases. This
was a signi cant step in enhancing the country's ability to combat terrorism.

3. **Coastal Security**: The attackers arrived in Mumbai by sea, highlighting vulnerabilities in

India's coastal security. After the attacks, India initiated the Coastal Security Scheme to improve
surveillance and patrolling of its coastlines.

4. **Maritime Security**: The attacks prompted India to enhance its maritime security capabilities,
including the acquisition of advanced patrol vessels, technology for maritime surveillance, and
strengthening the Indian Coast Guard.

5. **Counterterrorism Units**: Specialized counterterrorism units were created and equipped with
state-of-the-art weaponry and equipment. These units received extensive training in urban
warfare and hostage rescue.

6. **Capacity Building**: There was a renewed focus on enhancing the capabilities of security
forces, including the National Security Guard (NSG) and the Marine Commandos (Marcos).

7. **Crisis Response and Command Centers**: Crisis response mechanisms were put in place,
including dedicated command centers to manage and coordinate responses to terrorist incidents.

8. **Intelligence Sharing**: There was an increased emphasis on intelligence sharing and

collaboration with foreign intelligence agencies to detect and prevent future terrorist threats.

9. **Enhanced Surveillance**: India improved its surveillance capabilities, including the installation
of more CCTV cameras in public places, to monitor and respond to potential security threats.

10. **Public Awareness**: The attacks heightened public awareness of the threat of terrorism.
Citizens were encouraged to be more vigilant and to report suspicious activities.

The 26/11 attacks served as a wake-up call for India, leading to signi cant reforms in its security
policies and procedures. The country has continued to invest in improving its counterterrorism
capabilities and strengthening its ability to respond to security threats.

1.12 Lessons learned

Key takeaways from the 2008 Mumbai attacks (26/11) include:

1. Sophistication of Terrorists: The attackers demonstrated a high level of planning and

sophistication.

2. Importance of Intelligence: The need for e ective intelligence gathering and sharing was
evident.

3. Vulnerability of Urban Centers: The attacks highlighted the vulnerability of crowded urban
areas.

4. International Cooperation: The attacks emphasized the importance of global counterterrorism

cooperation.

5. Coastal and Maritime Security: Improved security measures along coastlines became crucial.

6. Rapid Response and Coordination: The need for quick, coordinated responses to such
incidents was evident.
ff
fi
ff
fi
 7. Public Awareness: Increased public vigilance and reporting of suspicious activities.

8. Security Reforms: Enhanced security policies and reforms in many countries.

9. Focus on Counterterrorism Training: Specialized training for security forces in urban warfare
and hostage rescue.

10. Diplomatic Challenges: Strained diplomatic relations and challenges in addressing state-
sponsored terrorism.

11. Justice and Accountability: The successful trial and execution of one attacker emphasises the
importance of justice and accountability.

1.13 Conclusion**
In conclusion, the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, often referred to as 26/11, stand as a stark
reminder of the devastating impact of terrorism and the need for comprehensive security
measures and international cooperation. These attacks revealed vulnerabilities in urban security
and the signi cance of rapid, coordinated responses to such crises.

The legacy of the Mumbai terror attacks includes increased vigilance, enhanced counterterrorism
capabilities, and the strengthening of intelligence sharing both in India and around the world. The
incident prompted reforms in security policies, legal frameworks, and the development of
specialized counterterrorism units.

Moreover, the attacks had lasting implications for diplomatic relations, particularly between India
and Pakistan, illustrating the complexities of addressing state-sponsored terrorism. The
successful trial and execution of the lone surviving attacker served as a testament to the
importance of justice and accountability.

Ultimately, the Mumbai terror attacks serve as a somber chapter in the ongoing global struggle
against terrorism, highlighting the resilience of communities, the necessity of unity, and the
constant e orts to prevent such tragic events from occurring in the future.

1.14 Thank-you
I want to express my heartfelt gratitude to all of you for your unwavering attention during this
presentation on the 26/11 attacks. Your engagement and interest are truly appreciated. If you
have any more questions or need further information, please don't hesitate to ask. Thank you for
being a part of this discussion.
ff
fi