Solo Reveals Terrorists’ Power Is Waning, but What’s Next?

This article analyzes the changing nature of terrorism in Indonesia, that moved from Jamaah Islamiyah/Al Qaeda model to loose groupings.
-----
Solo Reveals Terrorists’ Power Is Waning, but What’s Next?
Yohanes Sulaiman | September 27, 2011

Policemen and their bomb squad vehicle guard the site of an explosion at a church in Solo, Central Java, Sunday. (JG Photo/ Ali Lutfi)

Before people start talking about the ineffectiveness of the national security forces following Sunday’s suicide bombing in Solo, or speaking about the rise of extremism, I would argue that this attack shows that both the police and the State Intelligence Agency have actually done a good job. Thanks to firm action by the government and the National Police’s counter-terror squad Densus 88 in pursuing and hunting down terrorists, the power of groups like Jemaah Islamiyah to stage deadly attacks has declined significantly.

The reason is simple. Terrorist groups are personality-dependent entities. They can’t easily trust others, lest spies infiltrate them. As a result, they recruit and get their funds based on the close relationship between one key member of the group to the other members.

Thus, the reason why Indonesia’s JI has a close connection with Al Qaeda is due to their working together in Afghanistan back in the 1980s and later interaction in Mindanao, the Philippines. Such closeness creates a sense of comradeship, and trust.

As a result, when Densus 88 and the intelligence agency known as BIN managed to eliminate, or at least contain, key people such as Hambali and Noordin M. Top, the link between Al Qaeda and JI was strained. The ultimate coup was the isolation of Al Qaeda itself in Afghanistan due to pressure from the United States.

With JI severely weakened, there are very few people in Indonesia who can recruit and train the new extremists in the art of bombing, let alone finance them.

This weakness was also evident in the most recent spate of bombings. Pepi Fernando, who allegedly sent book bombs to various prominent figures in Jakarta in March, did not receive any training at all. He learned the art of bomb making from the Internet. During interrogation, he actually claimed that he did it in order to get the attention of Al Qaeda, which he hoped would offer much-needed funding and training.

The April suicide bombing of a police mosque in Cirebon bombing and the Solo bombing, while traumatizing, were far cries from the sophistication shown in JI attacks. These involved dual suicide bombings with high explosives and killed dozens or even hundreds of people. In short, the power of JI in Indonesia is ebbing and the recent attacks, to put it bluntly, were caused by JI-wannabes, who would never be able to cause as much damage and casualties as the JI of yesteryear did.

Police unfortunately have not been able to adapt to the changing threat. The new, relatively small and very tightly knit terror groups are difficult for police to infiltrate. It is simply impossible to ensure that there won’t be any more attacks from these small groups without seriously infringing on human rights.

What the police really need is a smarter approach in dealing with suicide bombers.

Political psychology expert Jerrold Post has argued that some terrorists are “lonely, isolated, alienated individuals who find, through the Internet, a sense of community — a community of hatred.” In essence, many terrorists are emotionally disturbed people who are easily influenced by radical discourse that would provide a sense of belonging and purpose, regardless of how twisted it is.

It is tempting to argue that shutting down radical Web sites would be the best way to solve this problem. Yet, as the Americans found out, the radicals would simply move to other sites.

What we really need is to foster a society in which radicalism and suicide bombing are socially unacceptable. Denunciations of bombings by Nahdlatul Ulama and Muhammadiyah are not enough, especially because radicals simply do not listen and pay attention to such mainstream groups.

The first step should thus be at schools. The quality of many religious teachers in schools is atrocious, however. This is reflected in an infamous Institute for Islamic and Peace Studies (LaKIP) survey that noted that 28.2 percent of Islamic Studies teachers were willing to commit religiously or morally motivated violence. A recent increase in the Religious Affairs Ministry’s budget should be used to make sure that only qualified teachers who back pluralism will be allowed to teach.

In addition, allowing groups like the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) to disregard laws and act with impunity will only give the signal that the government is half-hearted in dealing with extremism. Their radicalism in turn will inspire many misguided individuals to push for more violent actions to “defend Islam” and will fuel the rise of new terrorist groups.

Once the government deals firmly with extremism to promote a pluralistic Indonesia, coupled with better religious education, society will start looking at extremism as unacceptable. This in turn will lower the appeal of such groups and cause their downfall.