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