AS Singapore mourns its first victim killed in an overseas terrorist attack, the inevitable question that will cross people's minds is:
Why her and could she have been saved?
More so when questions have been raised over how the Indian authorities handled the terrorist attacks in Mumbai.
Among the close to 200 killed was Singaporean lawyer Lo Hwei Yen, 28, whose body was found on the 19th floor of the Oberoi Trident Hotel.
Ms Lo, who was in Mumbai for a one-day seminar, was understood to have been shot in the head and abdomen.
The Indian authorities have come under fire from several international quarters who alleged they bungled in dealing with the terrorists.
Israeli defence officials criticised the Indian security forces for prematurely storming besieged buildings, such as the Taj Mahal and Oberoi hotels and Nariman House.
They had said on Thursday that the counter-terrorist forces had failed to gather enough intelligence.
Said a former Shin Bet official: 'In hostage situations, the first thing the forces are supposed to do is assemble at the scene and begin collecting intelligence.
'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.'
Another view is that the Indian security forces were in a situation of damned if they do, damned if they don't.
A Singapore-based terrorism expert, Mr Arabinda Acharya, believed the Indian authorities had faced this catch-22 situation, which meant that the rescue operation was doomed to result in casualties.
The manager of strategic projects in the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research in Singapore said: 'There were definitely attempts by the authorities to minimise casualties, but the gunmen's plans were simple - to kill.
'They didn't come to negotiate. This is typical of Fadayeen or what you call 'no surrender' attacks.
'It was this scenario that made it hard for the Indian authorities to predict what was the next move,' Mr Acharya said in a telephone interview from India, where he is seeking medical treatment.
He said he would be going to Mumbai in a few days' time to meet with intelligence officials to learn more about the attacks.
Meanwhile, Israeli officials are trying to determine if Jewish hostages at the Chabad Centre at Narinam House were killed when commandos stormed the building or whether they had been killed earlier by the terrorists.
India had declined help when Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak had offered it after the terrorists struck on Wednesday.
There were also allegations from US security experts that the Indian authorities were ill-equipped in dealing with the terrorists.
They said the Indian troops lacked standard tools like tear gas and masks, laser-sighted guns and stun grenades.
However, they disagreed with Israelis' 'wait-and-see' approach, saying that the Indians were too slow to react.
Said former Federal Bureau of Investigation Hostage Rescue Team leader Danny Coulson: 'It's just like Columbine (where two students massacred students and teachers at a school in Colorado in 1999).
'If they're slaughtering people, you've got to go in.'
Another criticism alleged the authorities 'were caught completely unaware'.
Nevertheless, one Indian Army officer justified the actions taken by security forces.
Said Lt Gen N Thamburaj: 'Our operations had to be deliberate and slow because the life of the innocent hostages and innocent residents in the (Taj Mahal) hotel was of great importance to us.
'I have especially told the commandos who are taking part not to rush things.'
In the eyes of the security forces, the attack on the terrorists were a success.
A big part of it was due to the lack of political interference and the 'near perfect coordination' among the Black Cat commandos of the elite National Security Guard along with the Indian Navy's marine commandos and three armed forces, said defence officials.
Said an anonymous senior defence official: 'The key to success in the operation was the least political intervention.
'We assured the political top brass that we would keep them updated on the situation but also sought an assurance that there will be least political intervention in the operation.'
Given the difficulties faced on the ground, Mr Acharya believed the situation could not have been managed better.
With many rooms in hotels in which the terrorists had sought cover, it would have been a complex operation to flush them out without sustaining casualties, he said.
From a security perspective, there was no point in waiting, he added.
The authorities had to strike fast as the terrorists had made no specific demands.
Mr Acharya said: 'When one of the terrorists was asked by a journalist about their demands, he didn't answer. Instead, he talked to another terrorist before answering. They didn't come to negotiate and I still have the recording of the conversation.'
Israeli officials also noted that the Mumbai terrorists never demanded the release of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails or even mentioned the Middle East conflict.
But Mr Acharya felt that many Indians were unhappy that the authorities 'did not see it coming'.
'People are angry that the intelligence agencies had failed to predict the attack. It appeared there was also a lack of coordination between security agencies,' he said.
Ms Lo's body is expected to be flown back to Singapore today, accompanied by her husband, Mr Michael Puhaindran, 37.
She had called her husband and told him she had been taken hostage by terrorists.
On Friday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that her body had been found and identified.
