The centre has long been saying that terrorist camps in Afghanistan have been used to train Kashmiri militants, as well as mercenaries operating in Kashmir. If the US has, for reasons of its own, decided to attack these camps, surely we should unreservedly welcome the decision.

Instead, we have merely said that an international response to terrorism should be formulated.

This is impractical. Action against terrorists will necessarily have to be taken at short notice and with the need for utmost secrecy.

The tortuous processes of international consultation, every time a strike against terrorists is to be carried out, would be certain to make such strikes unsuccessful. Perhaps all that can be done is share intelligence about terrorists. This is the time for the government to make a public show of strong support for the US action.

To be sure, nobody should be under the impression that the US struck back because it wants to make the world safe against terrorism. It struck back because its own interests were threatened, and because president Bill Clinton wanted to prove that he was "doing something" about the Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam bombings.

There is no reason to believe that the US missile attacks were anything but symbolic, since it can hardly be argued that terrorism can be ended by such means.

Nevertheless, such action certainly sends out a signal to terrorists that the world's greatest power will not be afraid to take the offensive against them.

So far as India is concerned, the missile attacks present it with an opportunity to rebuild bridges with the US, while drawing international attention to Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.