Embassy bombing:

Embassy bombing:
Some questions

From Republika

Several questions have arisen from my observation of the
recent bombing incident at the Australian Embassy in Kuningan,
Jakarta, regarding the suicide label, blast position, bombing
motive, bomb-making and funding.

The label of a suicide bombing should be questioned because
the driver of the bomb-laden van may have only been paid to
deliver some "package", not necessarily a member of any bombing
group.

The position of the explosion supports this possibility. If
the driver really intended to attack the embassy, he should have
strived to penetrate into the Australian Embassy compound for
maximum effect. The blast, which was rather far from the gate,
did not achieve its motive (of victimizing Australians) and
instead sacrificed the lives of innocents outside the embassy.

Those initiating the various bombings in Indonesia have never
definitively claimed them as their actions or declared their
motives. This is unlike the bombing incidents abroad, where blast
targets and the international community have received clear
"messages" so that there is no speculation.

Conventional bombs that are home-assembled need chemicals,
equipment and a fairly long assembly process. If it is true that
the bomb was made by the fugitive Malaysian Dr. Azahari as
alleged, he must have had a mobile lab because the bomb was
estimated to have weighed 200 kilograms.

Meanwhile, after several years of bombing operations, it
raises the question as to the size of the funds at their
disposal, their financiers and bank accounts, which have enabled
their free movements and preparations. Can some "ordinary"
criminal activities be linked with a terrorist operation?

SATRIYO WIDIANTO
Bogor, West Java