Asian Angle | Malaysia must win hearts and minds to confront regional terrorism

It is vital that we do not ignore the relevant political aspects involved when we consider measures to counter terrorism. The Malayan Emergency (1948-1960) offers us the lesson that defeating terrorism is about winning hearts and minds. We should of course use the military approach, but at the same time, we need to consider the political background to the situation.

Indeed, the challenges facing national security today are multifaceted, and require a whole-of-society approach. While terrorism is not new to the region, some forms of it are. A good example if this is, of course, suicide bombing. We are no longer dealing merely with conventional warfare and state actors, and it is important for nations like ours to share intelligence and find ways to work together beyond borders. Terrorists do not recognise borders, and therefore states must not work in silos or in isolation.

We condemn all acts of terrorism and should do all we can to respond to them decisively. But we, as part of the global community, will also have to do our very best to ensure the root causes, the grievances and the excuses used to justify terrorism are removed politically and not allowed to fester.

And we must all be extremely cautious that activities in the name of counterterrorism do not fuel more grievances. Malaysia’s defence minister, Mat Sabu, has rightly pointed out that Myanmar’s handling of the Rohingya issue, and the inadequate provision of services as well as the striking lack of a clear future for refugees in Cox’s Bazaar, Bangladesh, could very well give rise to, and support for, acts of terrorism in the wider region in the not too distant future.

How do terrorists justify or legitimise their acts? More often than not, terrorists champion sections of society that are marginalised economically, politically, or in terms of national or religious identity. Firstly, terrorism can be a majority-minority problem. Secondly, it can be a centre-periphery problem. And lastly, terrorism can be an economic problem.

The cases of the Rohingya, Southern Philippines and Southern Thailand are all majority-minority problems, coupled with a dichotomy between a strong centre versus a marginalised periphery. Underlying all these is also an economic cause.

Meanwhile, Aceh in the past was also a case of centre-periphery rivalry. The devolution of power and self-rule for Aceh amid the decentralisation programme in Indonesia have shown that when power is shared with the prime movers of society, grievances are reduced and a sense of shared responsibility takes over.