An Asian view on radical Islam and terror

The Allies' fight against militant Islam is focused on Syria and parts of the Middle East. As if destroying IS in Syria will culminate in peace on earth and goodwill toward man. There is a whole new league of Islamic militants flourishing across the world with South East Asia being the frontrunner as the next frontier.

The UK-based The Economist reported early this year:

As the Islamic State continues its armed campaign in Iraq and Syria, its ideology is drawing fans and fighters from as far as Southern Asia and China. Importantly, four new terrorist organizations are already aiming to establish an Islamic Caliphate in the Far East region called Daulah Islamiyah Nusantara that is to comprise Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, southern Thailand and southern Philippines.

The authorities in South East Asia are, at best, dispassionate spectators to the carnage across Europe. The IS does not operate in South East Asia and is not a direct threat to the region.. But, the IS ideology and perceived triumphs in Europe, such as the recent Paris bombings, serve as inspiration for Islamic radicals in Asia.

South East Asia, and in particular Malaysia, Southern Thailand and Mindanao (in that order) are just breeding grounds for a sustained onslaught against all that is seen as not Islamic.

Malaysia, for instance, has a national Islamization strategy of its own that in broad terms sits well with IS ideology; minus the suicide bombers, for now.

The specter of terrorism however, offers opportunities for preserving the monopoly on political power by the authoritarian governments in the region. It is more often used as a tool to suppress disenchantment with the establishment than neutralizing actual terrorists; anchoring oppressive regimes and protecting the ruling elite who have an insatiable appetite for plunder. South East Asian Muslim oligarchs look to their counterparts in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Yemen and elsewhere in the Middle East for enlightenment and inventiveness in maintaining a lasting stranglehold on absolute power, and to the very obliging West, for financing that monopoly.

The Western powers are fully cognizant of the insidious polity of the South East Asian nemesis, for it is no different from their experience in the Middle East.

America perceived the arming of "rebel" groups in the Middle East as a viable complimentary business to destabilize governments that were inhospitable to American interests. There is little doubt that the birdbrained bureaucrats in Washington that consummated this nonsensical strategy are, to a large degree, responsible for the heinous threat from terrorism that Europe now faces. The policies have been a contemptible disaster that has boomeranged and is now the single most obvious cause for the threat to the security of the citizenry of the world.

Clearly, the policymakers of the West have blood on their hands. Yet, we find history repeating itself. America unashamedly cultivates the deadly regimes of South East Asia for the economic treasures that it holds. President Barrack Obama was in Malaysia in mid November 2015 for the ASEAN Summit where he oozed and gushed at the robber barons of South East Asia as they belched out melodramatic bluster about the evils of terrorism. Wink, wink, Nudge, nudge. Obama's priority is clearly his legacy as the outgoing President rather than the security of American citizenry or the world. Ignoring the immorality of consorting with suspected criminals who are officially under investigation and have not as yet been absolved of wrongdoing by America's very own enforcement agencies, brings Obama's sincerity into question and his character into disrepute.

The United Nations' cowardly excuse that these despotic regimes are the responsibility of its citizenry and the province of sovereign determination is cruelly senseless. The citizenry of these nations don't stand any chance in righting the wrongs within their borders when the UN sidesteps Western policies designed to set the natives up for failure. International apathy for criminal regimes and the synchronous sabotage of the efforts of Asian civil society for a more accountable domestic union in Asia can no longer be excused as acceptable collateral damage for Western economic gain. Not only because such an attitude is unscrupulous and sinful but because the wider repercussions are, as is now obvious, the threat to the lives of innocent inhabitants domestically and in the West. Surely, somewhere in the chronicles of Western law, such exploitative conduct is legally actionable.

Asian cynicism and distrust of Western administration therefore is defensible. Asians consider Western leaders equally corrupt as their Asian counterparts. Asians do not see Western leaders or even the United Nations as the guardians of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that the biased Western media portrays them to be. They believe that the leaders of the Western world operate far beyond the scope of the mandate of their office.

Such negativism is tempered however, by the belief in Asia that there is good in Western civil society.

Blessed in yesteryear with visionary and selfless statesmen, a system that empowers the people has evolved in Judeo Christian civilization that is the keystone of hope for billions around the world. Western civil society must urgently recognize and take responsibility for their utopian governments. Asians believe that it is Western civil society that will, when confronted by life threatening events, rein in their Governments that have prioritized gratifying the unbridled greed of Western capitalism and the political lust of government functionaries for global influence and an egotistic place in history, over their security.

Asians share the grief of Westerners for the tragic loss of innocent lives to terror activities in Europe. That grief is however diluted with mixed emotions of hope and trepidation for ourselves. On the one hand we see those tragedies as a life line for the rest of mankind. There seems to be nothing else that can possibly galvanize lazy Western civil society into examining the hitherto unsupervised immoral foray of their Governments in far away lands on some vague assertion that it is crucial to Western economic interests. Asians feel that Western civil society will take responsibility for its treasonous leaders and bureaucrats only when confronted with the reality that the trade off for economic colonization without contributing to the aspirations of Asian civil society, is a sustained threat to national security and the lives of their citizenry.

On the other hand, we fear that apathetic Western liberalism may yet be fooled and will not connect irresponsible governance with the rise of violent radicalism not only in the Middle East but in Asia and elsewhere. The Middle Eastern gravy train for Americans and Europeans has been stopped in its tracks by decades of civil unrest and military operations by Western powers. Asians realize that America and Europe now have their sights on South East Asia as a substitute for the resultant economic deficit from their disastrous outing in the Middle East. Asians pray that Western civil society will finally comprehend that although we do see benefits in economic association, it cannot and must not be by supporting the beastly regimes that nurture terrorism directly or indirectly as a means to deny democracy to its citizens; and which is the primary impetus for emigration to the West.

The panorama of radical Islam has caused a crisis in Western domestic policy. The fact that terrorists are already lurking within the borders of the West is indisputable. The Western authorities are obviously struggling to isolate and eradicate the threat. It seems that Western society is crippled by its own altruism and conscience in dealing with the fact that the threat is preeminently - Islam. God forbid that they be seen to be bigoted! Many in Asia were watching the live televised debate in the UK House of Commons about the need for the UK to engage in military action in Syria. There were chuckles all round when David Cameron suggested that the enemy should be referred to as "Daesh" in keeping with the terminology adopted by France and other allies, presumably to distinguish them from other Muslims. Apparently, Westerners should not be fooled into thinking that the enemy is Islam or Muslims. This is nothing short of a politically correct lie. It suggests that there is an identifiable enemy when in fact they have no clue who is Daesh and who is not. The enemy is an ideology. That ideology is rooted in Islam. For all intents and purposes, the only certainty is that the enemy is more likely than not, to be Muslim.

The paucity in Western domestic policy has been, and continues to be, disproportionate liberalism. Dangerously disproportionate to the threat that Islamic radicalism poses, sinfully disproportionate to Christian doctrine, shamelessly disproportionate to the need to preserve conservative values, and even scandalously disproportionate to the tenets of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. In the context of Islam and the threat to internal security, there is an inherent schism in liberalism.

Western liberals seem oblivious to the fact that the foundations of Islam are completely at odds with liberal democracy. Islam is rooted in conservatism, as is Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism and most world religion. They are however, at various stages of social and religious evolution. The disparity between Islamic ideology in its present stage of evolution and Western liberalism cannot as yet be bridged. The conceited notion that Western liberalism is a "one size fits all" concept is absurd. Imposing infinite diversity in a society is simply a recipe for the disastrous disintegration of that society. The micro correlation would be corporations, professional associations, cooperatives and even the family unit, whose lasting cohesion depends on harmony.

Western liberals imagine that something they quaintly refer to as "integration" is the key to fusion between them and Muslims. This can only be a euphemism for the indoctrination of Western values in Muslims or conversely the indoctrination of Islamic values in Western society. Asians ask bemusedly, "So, how's that going for you guys?!" Since there is no viable interface between the two ideological schools, it cannot possibly be a happy compromise of the two. Europe has been receiving Muslim migrants for the better part of half a century.

You would have thought that the fact that "integration" has been largely non-existent would have provided some clue about the futility of such delusions. Asians have been living amongst both, liberal and radical Muslims for generations, and we can tell you that this notion of "integration" is as about as likely as suicide bombers being blessed with 72 virgins in the hereafter. Western liberals in an effort to assuage their conscience about the rape and plunder of the Third World cannot, and should not be allowed to demand that Western civil society sacrifice its security and way of life for the sake of their bleeding hearts. Instead, they should demand an end to Machiavellian manipulation of Third World dictators to enrich Western capitalists. Asians are by nature entrepreneurial. We will welcome mutually beneficial economic cooperation but only if accompanied by meaningful diplomatic, political and even military reinforcement for the removal of oppressive regimes and the establishment of accountable and fair governments.

Liberal Western pomposity, hailed by the globally pervasive Western media as providing the right solutions, creates expectations of the rest of humanity. We, in Asia, have no illusions about the viability of Western liberal attitudes to addressing threats to our way of life. Already there is clamor by segments of society within our borders, that Asia should emulate the misguided policies of the West and open our arms to the very source of terrorism. It gives terrorists the impression that the imposition of their will through violence can and will work and validates their actions with their supporters. Asians pray, that Western civil society will demand a paradigm shift in foreign and domestic policies that will enable us all to get on with our lives, safely, in our own countries; complete with our culture, religious practices, ethnic values and, with the dignity we deserve.