Culture of terror

On Thursday, U.S. President George W. Bush announced that Congress would extend the government's surveillance and law enforcement powers to track down potential terrorists.

The Friday report from The Washington Post was accompanied by graphics of polls done by the paper with ABC News -- two graphics showed overwhelming opposition to suggestions to expand powers for the Federal Bureau of Investigation; but another poll showed that 59 percent agreed that the additional authority granted to the FBI since the terror attacks of 2001, should be continued. The additional power given to the bureau were in areas like "surveillance, wiretaps and obtaining records in terrorism investigations."

The latter poll reflects a relatively high level of trust among the American public toward its government and law enforcers. A poll among Indonesians on similar issues has not been done regarding recent developments in antiterrorism policies, but we can sense the cringing and skepticism greeting Thursday's report that the regional offices of the former intelligence body be revived -- in addition to the earlier frowns on the announcement that a new antiterror agency, supported by "terror desks", would be set up, apart from the existing National Intelligence Agency (BIN).

Apparently, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono sensed this anxiety too -- his Cabinet Secretary Sudi Silalahi said the reinstatement of the Regional Intelligence Coordinating Agency (Bakorinda) "is not aimed at frightening people, but rather to improve the coordination among our security authorities."

But frightened and concerned we are; given the track record of our intelligence authorities who have proved their skill in capturing suspected political dissidents, all while the masterminds of the bombing of Bali, the Marriott, the Australian Embassy, etc, ad nauseum, remain at large and continue to pose a fatal threat. The deadliest attack since Bali occurred just a couple of weeks ago in Tentena, Central Sulawesi, where at least 20 were killed in a crowded market. All these crimes occurred on the watch of current National Police Chief Gen. Da'i Bachtiar, who has not shown any intention of stepping aside for someone else we might be safer with.

Improving coordination among intelligence authorities is indeed urgent, for it was likely the main factor leading to the total failure to combat terrorism -- judging from the ever- growing body count, not merely these nice new policies. Unwillingness to share information among related authorities is an appalling legacy among the officials, in whom we must entrust our very lives. Therefore, we lend our total support to measures that will increase cooperation amongst them.

The government has also noticed how quiet the protests have been against the antiterror law, which increased the power of law enforcers to act against potential terrorists. For the sake of our security, we also succumb to regular checks of our handbags and cars, no longer thinking it an outlandish practice peculiar to places like Manila.

Public trust thus remains high; what else can we do, given the increasingly clear message from the terrorists: They do not care if victims and targets are young or old, foreign or local.

Therefore, we understand the government's efforts to change the intelligence system because the enemies of the state are no longer what they used to be. However, the government must also listen to the various voices in society, which have raised their concerns about the government's recent counter-terror move, by reminding them that they could undermine our newly found civil liberties, which we have fought hard for over the last decade.

Beyond all the talk of reforming BIN, installing "terror desks" and reviving the village spy network, people find it hard to believe that the culture of our intelligence agents, or intel as they are referred to with repugnance, can change. Call it paranoia, but it is hard to forget, for one, the testimony of the young activists who were kidnapped and tortured in the late 1990s just because they were "suspected" threats to the regime.

In the fight against terrorism, law enforcers can complain all they want about their lack of power compared to their counterparts in Malaysia or Singapore. But until there are much better checks and balances, we would like to see their improved record in this war before giving them a blank check and a potential return to the days when intelligence authorities professed ignorance about civil liberties and thought their job was to serve whoever had the power to define a "state enemy."

The question today is whether an overhaul in our intelligence system would include a total change in the culture; from a sinister tool of oppression and intimidation to one of intelligent fact-gathering, involving law enforcers who actually respect the law, as part of a system accountable to its citizens. It is not too much to ask from a president that we directly elected: That intelligence authorities end their own brand of terror.