Need New Approach To Understand Terrorism in Southeast Asia

After Noordin M. Top was killed by the Special Anti-Terrorism Task Force 88 (Densus 88), the public assumed that the threat of terrorism in Indonesia had ended. The official government information indicating a link between recent arrests in Aceh and the attack that killed Dulmatin in Pamulang, (West Java), as reported at Kompas.com in March 2010, have shattered that assumption. Terrorist actions still represent a dangerous threat.

Security personnel have linked the development of the latest threat with Dulmatin and Umar Patek, infamous terrorists who were among the most sought after suspects in Southeast Asia for years. The message is clear: this group still represents a threat in our region. The object of the authorities' search seems to have been a break-off group from Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), or a related organization. The security forces in the region consider that the security risks have risen, as reported by Singapore intelligence on the threat of terrorism in the Straits of Malacca.

Weapons and Funding
The official reports state that JI is a network organization of terrorists based throughout Southeast Asia. Although JI doesn't control all parts of the region where it is based, it is believed to be active in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. The JI is also considered to complement Al-Qa'ida in this region, such that the United Nations has classified it as an international terrorist organization.

Since George W. Bush launched a "global war on terror" under the hegemony of the US after the attacks of 9/11, JI has been classified as the main enemy in Southeast Asia. This region is considered the second front of the war on terrorism, although a number of experts question the relevance of this characterization, since the historical, social and political context of the region are quite different from the Middle East, for instance. The governments in the region, especially Indonesia's, with support from the US in the form of training, weapons and funding, are continuing to work hard to fight terrorist activities.

Weaknesses in Approach
There are two matters linked to terrorism in Indonesia that need to be noted. First, our understanding of terrorist activities is extremely limited. Studies on terrorism in Indonesia and Southeast Asia are dominated by studies with a traditional approach that is based on orthodox security studies and counter-insurgency studies. These kinds of studies tend to limit assumptions on the character, causes and solution to terrorism based on the notion of the nation-state. The problem is that the knowledge so far produced needs to be debated, since it is often not supported by strong empirical data (Jackson 2007) and is superficial.

The weakness of academic works on terrorism, especially on JI, has already been pointed out by Hamilton-Hart (2005). He reminds us of the quality of information and the simplification of terrorist activities as the actions of pathological actors. Many studies by terrorism experts are full of footnotes from police reports, prosecutors' charges, court defense statements, judges' decisions and intelligence reports, without fuller investigation of the historical context.

This is made worse by mainstream media reports that repeatedly publish and broadcast news based on these reports or on interviews with security officials who are considered to be authoritative. The main issue, according to Lafree and Dugan (2007), is that government data is full of political judgments about terrorism. Such studies can be confounded by what Herman and O'Sullivan (1989) characterize as the "terrorism industry." With a variety of actors, like government officials and agencies, research institutes, private security companies, this "industry" is actually working to serve the interests of the market.

Second, the resultant weakness of a knowledge base like this is the settling of terrorist actions by governments that rely on "war" approaches alone. It turns out that shooting suspects, jail, surveillance and using a rehabilitative approach on former terrorists does not to put an end to the terrorist threat. There is a need for comprehensive studies that avoid the assumption that violence is something endemic in religious teachings and that gets caught up in trying to unravel rings of terrorist actors.

Application of Neo-Liberalism
However, we need to focus attention on the political and economic environment in a particular period of time in which terrorist activities are taking place. The fact that many of the JI leaders were involved in the mujahidin struggle in Afghanistan in the 1980s signals that radicalism accompanied by violence that surfaces afterwards is strongly rooted in the Cold War. The mujahidin, including Osama Bin Laden, who took part in the counter-revolutionary war in Afghanistan, were praised by Ronald Reagan as heroes. The changes after the Cold War, the economic and political context of global terrorism, all need to be investigated.

The application of neo-liberalism, particularly through the instrument of the US imperialist war in Iraq, has only nurtured global sentiment through interrelated terrorist attacks. In Indonesia, anti-US rhetoric has found a fertile ground, and some of it has been channeled through terrorist actions and dissatisfaction with imperialism expressed through a religiously garbed struggle. This global tendency has mixed with a process of political and economic exclusion that has taken place during the last 10 years.

Sharpening of Class Differences
The sharpening of class differences, in which wealth is accumulated not only into the pockets of a few people, but is channeled to those in rich countries, has resulted in widespread social dissatisfaction. Poverty, unemployment, political and social exclusion are triggers for the rise of the illusion of violence as something sanctioned by religion.

The government needs to change its approach to the combating of terrorism from a "war" approach only to a new basic economic and political policy. It is urgent that the government be able to take issue with the US in relation to the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan and see them as the roots of terrorist actions. Barack Obama's visit should be used to convey a new political tone in this regard, not to be stuck in flat diplomacy, reporting the "successes" in combating terrorism, particularly if only done for political imagemaking.

China Explores Position in Straits of Malacca With Fleet Visits

China's guided missile frigates Zhoushan (FFG-529) and Xuzhou (FFG-530) paid visit to Malaysia and Singapore respectively in December 2009. While frigate Zhoshan would visit Singapore, frigate Xuzhou would visit Malaysia. The visit of Chinese frigate to Malaysia gave people a subtle meaning as if China wanted to ascertain the existence of the Straits of Malacca. This would be China's first fleet visit to Malaysia after a break of nine years. The last Chinese navy fleet visit to Malaysia was in July 2000. It was the Shenzhen destroyer (code name 167).
Foreign diplomats told China Press that it was unusual for China to split its frigates from the same third naval fleet escort team to visit Singapore and Malaysia separately. They said that in a subtle way China intended to explore the actual condition in Straits of Malacca. They said such an arrangement for two fleets to visiting two different localities was not very common.
Some diplomats from Tokyo also remarked that "The visit of Chinese fleet to Malaysia was very interesting!" This was because when Chinese President Hu Jintao visited Malaysia on 11 November 2009, he had made a special request to visit Malacca and to look at the Straits of Malacca. When President Hu Jintao concluded his 'look' at the Straits of Malacca, he left with this remarks, "When we see it, we will believe it." During that period, this remark by President Hu has stirred up considerable imaginary space of many observers.
"Zhoushan" and "Xuzhou" warships belong to the third Chinese naval escort fleet on its return journey after carrying out an escort mission against pirates in the Gulf of Aden. The third escort fleet team also has a supply ship called "Qiandaohu." All the three fleets belong to China navy's East Sea Fleet team.

The Reasons

After China's fleet visit to Malaysia, some diplomats did come out with some questions of why China would suddenly pay attention to the Straits of Malacca. First, they want to know the factors that trigger China suddenly paying attention to the Straits of Malacca. This is because in the past, although China did pay attention to the Straits of Malacca but they did not carry out actual actions such as paying fleet visit to the littoral states. Second, after President Hu Jintao took a closer look at the Straits of Malacca and said," we see it, we believe it," they want to know what does President Hu believe in? What will be China's new position on the Straits of Malacca?
In fact, in response to all these questions, as early as in May 2009, a Beijing diplomat has already indicated to me that with the stabilization of cross-straits relations, what China wanted to pay attention was the development in the Straits of Malacca. To China, the situation in South China Sea has become secondary important. The informed source told me more than once about this new trend in China in more than one occasion when we met.
As such, the China fleet visit to the Malaysia and its sailing through the Straits of Malacca is a way China wanted to say to the region that the existence of Straits of Malacca is meaningful to China. President Hu Jintao's inspection of the Straits of Malacca at an arranged platform seems to tell the world community that the existence of the Straits of Malacca has practical value to China. If needs arise, China would take political action to assume its duty to protect the security of the Straits of Malacca. Such action would also be in line with China's belief in "advantage boundary."

Military Cooperation With Southeast Asian Nations
Indication shows that China is keen to strengthen military cooperation with Southeast Asian nations. China and Thailand have a plan to carry out military exercise in 2010 although the scale of this military cooperation is not very big. Besides, China's military equipment can also be found in East Timor. East Timor has introduced two Chinese 'Shanghai Class' military petrol vessels. Such development seems to confirm with the reality that "wherever there is strategic resource, there will always be a third force to export its military weapon there." East Timor's relationship with China can be similar to China's relationship with some African countries. This is because East Timor has oil reserves that China can use.
With China's guided missile frigates Zhoushan (FFG-529) and Xuzhou (FFG-530) paid officially visit to the littoral states of the Straits of Malacca, it serves to confirm that China indeed is now making effort to strengthen its military cooperation with Southeast Asian countries.
However, the question is, why did not China allow its Xuzhou navy fleet to participate in the LIMA (Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace Exhibition) 2009 held in Langkawi Island from 1 to 5 December? Could it be that the time was not right? Could it be that China has deliberately tried to avoid its presence? Or could it be that China would want to use another platform for its fleet presence to the region in the coming days?

Implication of Hu Jintao's Statement
Moreover, during President Hu Jintao's official visit to Malaysia and as President Hu Jintao looked at the Straits of Malacca and told his official visiting team and other representatives that "seeing is believing," what could President Hu's statement mean? When a national leader from a big nation came out with such a statement publicly, it would certainly carry some significant meaning
"What made China paying more attention to the Straits of Malacca now? What did President Hu Jintao believe when he faced the Malacca Straits?"
At the LIMA 09 event, we shared views with foreign diplomats and strategist specialists of the implication of Hu's Malacca Straits statement. However, we could not come out with a solid conclusion. Perhaps the intention of Hu was to give the region an "imagination space." The first episode of this 'imagination space' was perhaps the visit of Chinese fleet Suzhou to the Malacca Straits. Nevertheless, if there is really a second episode of "imagination space" coming out from China about the Straits of Malacca, we hope this second episode of imaginary space is when China upholds its "maritime harmony" proposal to create a 'beautiful Straits of Malacca." Above all, we do not want to see the emergence of a new maritime power turning the region into a platform for military strategic game. This is because the control of Straits of Malacca affairs reminds in the hands of the littoral states that comprise of Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand.

Obama Visits China

US President Barack Obama headed for Beijing and continued his historical first trip to China. Some media commentaries say the impact and significance of President Obama's first official trip to China can be comparable to former US President Richard Nixon's first official trip to China in 1972 and former US President Clinton's first official visit to China in 1997. This is because all the three US presidential trips to China carried with them the respective US President's intention to create a new chapter in US-Sino ties.

Balance of Power
Since the course of world events shifted from the bipolar confrontational Cold War era into the post-Cold War multi-polar era characterized by balance of power, the US-China relationship has been rebuilt all over again in the form of strategic partnership relationship. Of course, in between those past years, of note was that the US-Sino ties did go through some setback due to the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown frustration.
In the future, political ideological or political dogma will no longer be the key element in the new international order structure. Instead, the pragmatic economic strength of major powers will become the base of international order and power in the coming days. How the United States can continue to play its leading and dominant role in the international new order will depend on whether the United States can display its decisive influential power in the international economic new map that is gradually taking the form in regional regrouping and integration.
Before leaving the United States, President Obama said that the United States planned to conduct friendly competition with China focusing on consumers and competition in the trade market. The so-called friendly competition should include the RMB appreciation, trade liberalization, trade balance, intellectual property rights and other issues. But these are all highly controversial issues. It would be difficult for President Obama to reap concrete gains within short period of visit. President Obama's visit to China is but a symbolic tour. There are more to be done.

US National Interest
Thiry-seven years ago, When Nixon's plane touched down in Beijing, Nixon said: "I came for US interest!" 12 years ago, when Bill Clinton defended his China policy, he said: "I went to Beijing because of US national interest!" This time, President Obama also pledged to protect US interests for this China trip. He even said that the Democratic Party would as always, and be more attentive than the Republican Party to attend zero level of trade pattern with China. Because of the reality that economic power has become a dominant factor in future international order, and since the Asia-Pacific countries, especially China have shown strong economic growth force from the beginning of this new century, President Obama has to make his way to knock at the gate of the East.
The mission of President Obama's Asian trip is to reduce trade friction with China. It is also the US intention to build a 'containment' defense line along Asia-Pacific to protest the US interests. This containment line will begin from Australia in down south going through Singapore along the Straits of Malacca and turn north to link up the southern Korea Peninsula until the Japanese archipelago. The target of this US containment line is self-evidently pointing to China. Before President Obama left Washington, he stressed that "within the clear framework of international rules, the United States and China should each bear their corresponding responsibility."
It is obvious that the United States expects the Beijing authority to undertake the responsibility to protect global environment, human rights, etc. At the same time, President Obama also pledged to "intensify the efforts for the United States to involve in Asian affairs." This shows that the United States still wants to maintain its status as a military strong power in Asia to ensure the security and peace in the Asia-Pacific region and to continue taking up its role to maintain the balance of power in the region.

Change in US Strategy
This change in US strategy in the Asia Pacific region is reflected in the transformation of foreign intelligence gathering tasks of the US Central Intelligence Agency (USCIA) which puts emphasis on the intelligence collection and research analysis on China and Japan. This is probably because there are many unpredictable variables in China's future. The United States naturally does not want to take China lightly. On the other hand, the penetration and invasion of Japan's economic and trade power in the United States have also resulted in the USCIA having the need to strengthen Japan's industrial intelligence gathering research effort.
In the past, cooperation of the United States, Japan and Asian countries is rooted in the common interests of wanting to ward off the threat coming from former Soviet Union. Now the Soviet Union as a major power does not exist anymore. With the emergence of China, the common interests between the United States and Japan will need to re-adjust and re-position. Precisely at this time, the difference in the economic strength between of the United States and China, its Asian economic rival, is also getting larger. Therefore, from Washington's perspective, the most important calculations for the United States to establish a new international order will include on how the United States can reduce trade and economic difference with China, how the United States can regain trade balance with China, and how the United States can cooperate with China to form an interactive strategic partnership relationship.

Strategic Partnership
From President Obama's China trip to Hu Jintao's later US trip, we should by now understand that the "strategic partnership" of both nations will continue to improve as the result of change in international situation. The United States' "constructive engagement" with China will also become more pragmatic when it is driven by national interest.
As for the substantive issues of concern to the United States, we trust the United States will hold on tightly to them. But as for non-substantive issues the United States will gradually let go when dealing with China. We cannot expect President Obama' first visit to China can make concrete gains. This is also the intricate of the US-Sino Strategic Partnership spirit that amid friendliness diplomatic visits, there are also competition.