Search
Share & Follow Religion News Blog
Remember These Stories?
See no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil
Oh no, not another JI report! But this topic can’t be wished away
White Paper on JI arrests should be the basis of a discussion for greater cohesion – for the battles are still being waged
The Straits Times (Singapore), Jan. 10, 2003
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/
There are riveting revelations aplenty about Jemaah Islamiah’s (JI) plans to manipulate the minds of its members and use them for a campaign of mayhem and massacre.
But no one should expect the White Paper on the Jemaah Islamiah Arrests and The Threat of Terrorism to fly off the shelves like a Tom Clancy novel. Despite it being the biggest story in years, the White Paper, in all likelihood, will not create a major buzz among Singaporeans.
This is partly because it induces a sense of deja vu. A been-there-discussed-that sort of feeling.
People are already all too familiar with the big picture from the authorities’ earlier announcements, the speeches by politicians and the reams of analyses from terror experts.
What is more, most Singaporeans are longing for normalcy. There is only so much drama one can take.
The public has had to grapple with the dark menace of terrorism for a full year now. Whether about the JI or Al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden or his South-east Asian wannabe Hambali, there has been an almost daily deluge of reports on the topic.
It has been an especially uncomfortable year for Singapore’s Muslims, most of whom are harmless, law-abiding folk who just want to be left to pursue their practices in peace.
But no such luck. Muslims have had to account for themselves in the ensuing debate about racial and religious relations. Truth be told, some are in denial, refusing to see a link between the JI phenomenon and the tendencies in their community towards more foreign-influenced, austere and extreme perspectives.
Here, two questions need to be answered. Do Muslims have to take responsibility for the misguided acts and beliefs of these few? No.
Do they have to take responsibility in making sure that the ideology of the few do not become that of the many? Yes.
Why? Because the JI and its associates are engaged in an ideological war of attrition. They want to be the last Muslims standing. They want their militant brand of Islam to be the only brand of Islam in existence.
They consider those who do not support their violent cause – meaning most Muslims – to be infidels. Defectors are similarly labelled.
According to the White Paper, those arrested used a sophisticated array of psychological tactics to forge cult-like group identity. But, these were no mystics out of touch with the modern world.
They spoke English, conducted business with non-Muslims, kept regular jobs and led middle-class lives. Indeed, they held material wealth to be second in importance only to religiosity.
They also had the technological savvy to provide instructions to their members on how to avoid leaving any digital trails in their computers and telephones.
Singaporeans, Muslim and non-Muslim, want closure. After listening to the exhortations to build bridges between communities, after the setting up of Inter-Racial Confidence Circles, and the implementation of various new security measures, people are ready to move on.
The sense one gets is that non-Muslims too want to be able to return to the familiar territory of polite distance and detachment when it comes to discussing race and religion.
Unfortunately, there can be no neat resolution to the problems that surfaced a year ago.
This is the challenge for the Government as it disseminates the White Paper and prepares the ground for a parliamentary debate on Jan 20. The intended audience may be seeking closure where there will be none forthcoming immediately.
Singaporeans must brace themselves for another round of discussion and more bouts of soul-searching.
This need not be an unhealthy process. There are indeed several unresolved issues that need to be addressed if Singapore is to press ahead. Expect some of these to be raised before and during the parliamentary debate.
One is a procedural question. When and how will the public get independent verification of the facts as contained in the White Paper?
Will the detainees be tried in open court so that the public can hear them first-hand or is that out of the question?
A second issue is more philosophical, but nevertheless central.
How can Singaporeans become more religious – which is not a bad thing except maybe in the eyes of rabid agnostics and atheists – without falling under the spell of extreme and exclusive groups?
Distinguishing benign religiosity from dangerous militancy is important not only for the faithful, but also to prevent others from overreacting to their neighbours’ harmless practices.
Third is the international dimension. Singapore cannot insulate itself from the world. However, it is reasonable for people to ask if links with religious institutions abroad are becoming conduits for alien and extreme ideologies.
It is also increasingly common to hear Singaporeans wonder aloud if the United States is too influential here and elsewhere.
Can Singapore avoid becoming a battleground for non-Singaporeans’ battles? Or is the nature of the militancy we are witnessing impossible for any state to avoid, no matter the friends it keeps?
The White Paper should be the basis of a discussion for greater cohesion, not greater rancour. Been there, discussed that? For certain, but when the battles are still being waged, and the results unclear, the debate must go on.
Bookmark, Share, or Email This Page
Read Another Article
|
Related News Articles
Topic(s): 
Subscribe to Religion News Blog updates
Find Related Information
Find Related 
Possibly related... or Most Popular Religion News Articles
Search Religion News Blog