Plenty left to do in fight against terrorism<\/p>\n
Bantarto Bandoro, Editor, The Indonesian Quarterly'
\nCentre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
\nJakarta, bandoro@csis.or.id<\/p>\n
Amrozi bin Nurhasyim, a Muslim militant dubbed the \"smiling
\nassassin\", was sentenced to death on Thursday for his part in
\nlast year's deadly night club bombing on Bali.<\/p>\n
The verdict came just two days after a bomb explosion at the
\nJW Marriott hotel in Jakarta, and coincides with concerns that a
\nshadowy Southeast Asia network linked to al-Qaeda might be
\nplotting further attacks.<\/p>\n
The verdict also came at the same time a bomb exploded in
\nPoso, Central Sulawesi, on Thursday. Experts in terrorism said
\nthat another series of bombings would likely occur following
\nAmrozi's verdict.<\/p>\n
The government, accused of being too soft on terrorists before
\nthe Bali bombings, has been eager to demonstrate to the world
\nthat it is committed to bringing the perpetrators to justice. The
\npublic, however, is not satisfied enough with the way the
\ngovernment is tackling the problem of terrorists, in spite of the
\nenactment of the country's antiterrorist law, given that
\nterrorist attacks have recurred, apparently undetected.<\/p>\n
Amrozi's death sentence, to some extent, has provided some
\nsense of comfort to those who lost their loved ones. But the
\ngovernment should not be complacent about this. The Marriott
\nbombing and Amrozi's statement made after the verdict was
\ndelivered, that there will be \"a million more Amrozis\", sent a
\nclear message that more bomb attacks could be expected.<\/p>\n
Terrorism, in whatever form, will continue to be a grave
\nthreat to national stability and security. The government clearly
\nhas much left to do. It must initiate more decisive national
\nmeasures to contain the threat of terrorism.<\/p>\n
If the Amrozi verdict is followed by similar convictions for
\nthe other defendants, our notoriously inefficient judicial system
\ncould get a much needed boost in its efforts to control those who
\nappear to be Islamic radicals. But the problem of confronting the
\nterrorism threat is not only about strengthening our judicial
\nsystem; it is also about law enforcement.<\/p>\n
It is, after all, about national security and stability.<\/p>\n
Combating terrorism should be placed within the framework of
\nnational security efforts, meaning that the process of battening
\ndown national security must be increasingly correlated with
\nthreat of domestic terrorism. If a series of terrorist acts were
\nto occur following Amrozi's verdict, perhaps it is time for the
\ngovernment to use national security concerns to justify the
\nintroduction of a more decisive and, if necessary, repressive,
\nantiterrorist measures.<\/p>\n
Such steps would, however, have to be built on the belief that
\ndomestic terrorist acts are treated as criminal acts that pose a
\ngrave threat to national security regardless of their
\nmotivations. It is thus important that the coming verdicts on the
\nother alleged bombers also be based on considerations of national
\nsecurity.<\/p>\n
Many among the public would hope that the panel of judges for
\nthe other Bali bombing trials would declare the same verdict as
\nthat handed down to Amrozi. It is hoped that the final court
\ndecisions would have some practical effects on the way the
\ngovernment is pursuing its antiterrorism policy. The death
\npenalty for other defendants, should they deserve it, would
\ncertainly heighten the public's demand for a more active role by
\nlaw enforcers in combating terrorism.<\/p>\n
Thus, a concerted and systematic effort is indeed imperative
\nif the government is to gain the sympathy and moral support of
\nthe public in its fight against terrorists.<\/p>\n
The public expects authorities to arrest the perpetrators of
\nthe Marriott bombing immediately. If they are captured, National
\nPolice chief Gen. Da'i Bachtiar should not show the same
\ncordiality to them as he did to Amrozi. What most people remember
\nabout Amrozi was his behavior at a strange public interrogation
\nconducted by the police chief a month after the blast, at which
\nthey met in an atmosphere of friendliness.<\/p>\n
This coverage sparked revulsion from foreign countries --
\nparticularly Australia -- which suffered the greatest number of
\nvictims in the Bali attack. Investigators should obviously be
\nsensitive to public perception.<\/p>\n
The government's new approaches toward combating terrorists,
\nif any, must be able to convince the public that it does have
\nadequate counterterrorism measures in place -- although even this
\nwould not be a reason for complacency.<\/p>\n
Attacks, when they occur, are seen as the failure of a system,
\na lack of vigilance that can be fixed only by the introduction of
\nnew, decisive and accurate national measures. Terrorism must be
\nprevented from placing the government on the defensive.<\/p>\n
Learning from past experiences, the decision to engage actors
\nother than government elements in particularly \"offensive\"
\nactivities must now be considered. Terrorists must not be feared,
\nbut confronted at all costs.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/plenty-left-to-do-in-fight-against-terrorism-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}