Counter intelligence bolstered following U.S. fears

Further signs of a new breed of terrorism have been linked to last Tuesday's attack on America. The Jakarta Post's reporter Tiarma Siboro talked to former defense attache at the Indonesian Embassy in the United States (1997-1998) Maj.Gen. Sudradjat, now director general of defense strategy at the Ministry of Defense. A former secretary to then military chief Gen.(ret.) Benny Moerdani, he graduated in 1971 from the military academy and served as the military attache in Britain (1994-1997). Sudradjat was also the military's information officer from 1999 to 2000. The following is an excerpt of the interview:

Question:What kind of network is needed for the management of such international-scale terrorism?

Answer: Such highly skilled methods need relatively large funds for transportation, mobility and communication. And of course all moves would have to be of the greatest secrecy. It seems that these terrorists have large, but still limited funds. However, they have deeply fanatic, extreme people with a very strong conviction in what they're doing.

People like this are highly capable of maintaining confidentiality and this has led to difficulty in tracing them by our intelligence people. Terrorism is largely clandestine and the only way to overcome them is through counterintelligence, either by countries like ours or the U.S. and other states. A number of groups have claimed credit for last Tuesday's attacks like Japan's Red Army, organizations in Palestine and even Israeli intelligence, Mossad. Which group could be the most likely to have been involved in last week's tragedy?

Such organizations act individually and have their own motives. But when one of them carries out one action, others reap the benefit, mainly as a chance to proclaim their existence, because once people are scared of them, they can dictate their will to the public, a state or a group.

The evil thing is that whatever the motives, political or ideological, terrorist acts destroy human security and thus become the enemy of human security and civilized modes of behavior such as abiding by the law and ethics and values of humanity and democracy, and not merely the enemy of their target country. How do you see the accusations against Osama bin Laden?

He is thought to have substantial funds and has declared war against Israel and the U.S. Theoretically he is an enemy of the U.S. and investigations will develop, though we'll never know until there is evidence of the mastermind behind these attacks.

So could last Tuesday's attacks spread elsewhere?

The attacks in New York and Washington were carried out by terrorist groups against the U.S. They will surely try to disrupt U.S. interests. But there are also many terrorists against the governments of Turkey, Israel or the Philippines, for instance.

The terrorists who hit the U.S. may not target other countries, unless they are aiming at U.S. interests in other countries. Of course we'll have to watch for the likelihood of this happening in Indonesia, so it is in our interest to anticipate and overcome this threat.

The Central Intelligence Agency reportedly told the U.S. Congress last year that international terrorists would thrive in countries in transition such as in Indonesia, particularly given the world's largest Muslim population here. Your comment?

Until now there has not been any accusations from the U.S. government that what happened in Washington and New York was "Islamic terrorism."

I personally do not see the relationship either ... Indonesia has officially condemned these actions. There are indeed indications that the actors have Arabic names and are of Arabic ethnicity. This doesn't mean Islam, although the actors could be Muslim ...

We're also approaching religious leaders at the pesantren (traditional Islamic boarding schools) to make them more aware of the outside world ...

But Indonesia and other countries in Asia have been said to show indications as potential breeding grounds for terrorism.

International terrorism is widespread, such as seen in the actions of Japan's Red Army, a radical movement with nothing to do with their religion. Acts of terror indeed often use the Islamic banner to attract sympathy, hence the fears that they seek support from Muslim societies including Indonesia, given the large Islamic population.

For instance the bombing at the Atrium (in Jakarta). The actors were from Malaysia and used the Islamic banner, but instead it was an insult to Islam. Indonesians have reacted strongly against such acts of terror and are against their country becoming a breeding ground for terrorism. But we cannot ignore the above assumptions from the U.S. What has been done in anticipation of such possibilities?

Regarding the earlier appeal of the U.S. Embassy, or the U.S. government (that the Indonesian government provide tighter security for the U.S. presence here) our security people have already been on the alert; Muslims here have also been on guard to prevent any facilitation to terrorists.

Some time ago Indonesia faced terrorist acts such as the (1981) hijacking of the Woyla aircraft in Thailand. This is one form of terrorism that we've experienced, which was condemned by all Muslims here.

The indications raised by the U.S. reflect fears of its government. Indonesia has actually long engaged in counterintelligence ... against those involved in international terrorism.

With this confirmation from the U.S. Indonesia has increased its counterintelligence activities. Of course this has to be done through cooperation with other countries, including regional cooperation. What forms of terrorism must we look out for in Indonesia?

The forms of terrorism here are disruptions to security such as bombs; the political motives have not become quite clear yet. There are a number of cases related to the Free Aceh Movement, which has the aspiration that Aceh should be an independent country, and issues of justice -- the main ground for terrorism.

To prevent the growth of domestic terrorism we must promote justice. The second basis of terrorism is political divisions. We're experiencing political problems in Aceh, also in Irian Jaya and to a lesser degree we have the social gap in Ambon (Maluku).

Of course we must be able to overcome all these through counterintelligence, a firm upholding of the law and a stable political environment. The military and police, such as in Aceh, have also been considered a source of terror. Your comment?

As in Aceh, the military and the police are doing their job in line with Presidential Decree no. 4/2001 (issued by former president Abdurrahman Wahid to restore order in Aceh).

Some people may get the image that the military/police presence is a form of terror. This is not entirely right because what's happening there is a multifarious issue. In Aceh obviously much of the terror involves the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) whose members sometimes disguise themselves as military/police members. They're strong in information warfare and people could succumb to their campaigns and accuse the military and police of terror. However the murders in Idi Rayeuk (in August this year when at least 20 died in the district south of East Aceh's capital, Langsa) were clearly extraordinary acts of terror that involved GAM.

The presence of the military and police is to capture armed people in Aceh. Of course this involves small-scale combat, when their actions are on a par with those of GAM; they frighten people and make them think there is terror among them.