COUNTERTERRORISM COOPERATION IN ASEAN : IMPACT ANALYSIS

1.0

INTRODUCTION

According to an article by Amitav Acharya entitled Terrorism and Security in Asia: Redefining
Regional Order?, she concluded that after the 11th September attack, the security threat in the
Asia and East Asia region are affected by four (4) main factors that evolves around the balance
of power between the region with major powers concerning (i) the rise of China and its
competition with the US, (ii) perceive threat from states that are undergoing or facing internal
conflicts such as North Korea, Taiwan, Kashmir and Spratly Islands, (iii) political unrest and
economic crisis surrounding Asia, and (iv) the upcoming multilateral cooperation and
deliberations with countries at stakes and ASEAN such as ARF and others. She added that,
however the most unprecedented perceived threats in Asia region is the rising radical movement,
extremist and terrorist.
In the heat of post-September 11 attacks, many tend to believe that it was an act of Islamic
radical or extremist movement that in the end translated into an act of terror to what seems
opposing to their radical objectives and notions. The act is seen as a preferred alternative by
groups that lack the material and manpower to engage governments and the international society
in symmetric warfare, hence, to strike terror is the cheapest means of bringing opponents to their
will. The issue of violence and its interconnectivity with religion has become a major debate and
discussions, as well as research. The world unanimously accepted terrorism as an international
threat after the Cold War. There have been numerous definitions on terrorism. Terrorism that
came from the root word terrere connotes cause to tremble is a true manifestation of igniting
terror or horror via action and premeditated act to terrify and to cause mass grievances to people.
According to Harmon C. Christopher (2000), the art of terrorism was introduced into modern
politics in 1793 by two of more radial Jacobin leaders of the Committee of Public Safety in Paris,
Robespierre and Louis St Just, whom during the French Revolution in their bid to gain power
inaugurated to reign of terror, which reputedly claimed more than 40,0000 lives. Terrorism
therefore is about power and involves casualties. Harmon also sees terrorism as the deliberate
and systemic murder, maiming, and menacing of the innocent to inspire fear for political ends.
1

Therefore, radicalism and terrorism works hand in hand to cause drastic changes with political
ends to their mission and cause. The cause is certain. The means are violence. The targets are
who ever in their way regardless innocence or not.
Terrorism has over the past few centuries developed into a sophisticated activity and its influence
extended into an international network. The Westerners have expressed that the problem of
international terrorism will be a serious security threat to the world especially the Western
countries. (K.S Balakrishnan,2002). The growing attention that has multiplied after the attack has
sum up the notion of it as the uprising radicalism and religious extremist that spurns from radical
movement and militants expansionism. Moreover, the horror of hjacked commercial airlines
crashing into the towers and Pentagon, as the political and military assets has send shock waves
and reverbated through Asia, raising fears that terrorist would strike at any American military
facilities in Japan and South Korea, at United States (US) embassies and consulates and at all the
tall buildings that dominate the skylines of the regions larger cities (Zawiah Yahya, 2015) .
The US launches the War on Terror (WOT) and continues to mention Asia as a key battleground
in this on-going struggle. This should not come as a surprise since current evidence suggests a
strategic shift of terrorism from the Middle East to South and Southeast Asia. Southeast Asia is
considered as one of the important fronts in this war against terrorism. Being home to the largest
Muslim population, Southeast Asia has a large number of established Muslim radical groups that
are sympathetic to the oppressed Muslim community (Dillion, Dana R & Paolo Pasicolan, 2001).
The proposition made is based on two factors which is 1) the existence of Jemaah Islamiyah and
its connection with Al-Qaeda, the rebellious Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) in the
Southern Philippines and the latest Islamic State (IS).The aftermath of the terrorist attack in
WTC, which is said to be igniting few other incidences such as the Bali Bombing (2002), Paris
Attack (2015), Jakarta Attack (2016) and few others has reiterate the US grievances over the
spreading and expansion of terrorism and undeniably confirm their blatant accusations that Asia
and East Asia is the hub for radicalist and religious extremist movements.
According to Zachary Abuza (2003), there are a number of reasons why Al-Qaeda chose to
expand in the region: The Afghan connection to Middle East extremists, the growth of Islamic
grievances within Southeast Asian states, and more importantly the fact that Southeast Asian
2

states are countries of conveniences. The latter reason has come about because the region is
home to the worlds most populous Muslim majority area-some 230 million Muslims- with
Indonesia as the largest Muslim country followed by Malaysia and Brunei and there are
significant Muslim minorities residing in the Philippines, Thailand and Singapore. He also said
that, the security forces and governments in the region are plagued by endemic corruption, lax
immigration procedures and easy access due to tourism; porous borders; and considerable
financial linkages between the region and the Middle East. In addition to that, according to him
that, Southeast Asia is so appealing to Al-Qaeda leadership in the first place was due to
bureaucratic enertia, a lack of political will, and diplomatic pressure. All theses factors, creates
an enabling environment that push terrorist organizations to make Southeast Asia as their back
office for their activities.
2.0 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Right after September 11 incidence, in an act to wage war on terror and struck back in vengeance
at enemies (Osman Bakar,2009), United States invades Afghanistan in pursue of diminishing the
influence of Taliban and later in Iraq. For George W. Bush at that time, taking the course was
necessary and it was strategic in order to call upon the world to fight against one common
enemy. The WOT was successfully embraced by the world where many countries echoed the
need to find the perpetrators of the attack and eliminates them at one. But, the WOT has received
much critiques too. The invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq has been the consequence of the attack
and the impact and outcome is yet materialized. WOT in Afghanistan and Iraq causes more
grievances and casualties than the cause of the act-which is the casualties from the WTC
incidence. From the general perspectives of Muslims, these unwelcome happenings also turned
out to be the most destructive consequences of the September 11 tragedy on the Islamic World
(Osman Bakar, 2009). Therefore, combating terror with another sorrowful sights of invasion are
not the best solutions to peace and stability.
Based on this earlier WOT strategies, 14 years later, President Obama convened the White
House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism in February 2015, in which more than 60
countries, 12 multilateral bodies, and representatives from civil society, business, and the faith
community launched a global whole-of-society effort to tackle the broad range of factors
fueling violent extremism (States Department CT Reports 2015). The change in the strategies
3

that evolves through times and experiences shows that engaging in cooperation is far more
beneficial than engaging a direct war. In tandem with this, the United Nations has endeavored to
establish a global norm that sees counterterrorism as an initiative for peace in the 21st century. In
2001, the UN Security Council (UNSC) adopted Resolution 1373, which aims to hinder
terrorism in various ways. It also established the UNSC Counter-Terrorism Committee to
monitor state compliance with provisions in the resolution. Since then, counterterrorism has
become a major component of global governance, and regional responses have been sought
throughout the world. In 2006, United Nations and all its general assemblies members agreed to
a common strategy network and came out with UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. The
Strategy is a unique instrument to enhance the efforts of the international community to counter
terrorism along four pillars:
1) Addressing conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism;
2) Preventing and combatting terrorism;
3) Building Member States capacity to prevent and combat terrorism and to strengthen the
role of the United Nations system in this regard;
4) Ensuring the respect for human rights for all and the rule of law as the fundamental basis
for countering terrorism.
In response to that, governments across the region actively sought to address threats and degrade
the ability of terrorist groups to operate. Southeast Asian countries actively participated in
regional, international, and multilateral efforts to counter terrorism via ASEAN. ASEAN
recognises the importance of regional cooperation in the war against terror or by counter
terrorism. S.Pushpanathan (2012) stated that ASEANs efforts to address terrorism and
transnational crime started even before the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United
States. Counter terrorism policies have existed in the region, especially in the 1950s and 1960s
(Bilveer Singh,(2011) during Cold Wars when the penetrations and the terrorism have been
widespread by communist parties or Japanese colonization in South East Asia. Their aim was
similar to the terrorist act poses by ISIL or any other militant like operation that is to destabilize
and overthrowing governments in the region. Therefore, counterterrorism is a ways and means
to limit, manage and mitigate terror (Adam D. Tyson,2011)

The swift turn over to the Asia region and particularly East Asia was not shocking. According to
Paul J. Smith, terrorism has generally been associated with the Middle East, Western Europe or
North America, but however, Asia is taking center stage in the world of international terrorism.
He said that, during times of economic crises or social tension, Asia became vulnerable to
greater tension. In addition to ethnic, religious and political fissures driving the rise of terrorism,
the spread of transnational crime and other forms of lawlessness also facilitate its spread (Paul J.
Smith,nd). Asia particularly South East Asia provides opportunities and abundance resources for
terrorism to wide spread and strengthen their movements. He added that, Bangkok, Thailand for
example is a virtual emporium of fake passports and other identity papers, as well as a major
gathering place for nearly all global criminal organizations-ranging from Russian mafia groups
to Chinese snakehead. All these happenings, with loose enforcement that opens the floodgates
for spreading of the movements plus banking systems that is not regulated that proved to be an
essence for terrorism funding activities is all the more reasons for the region to take effective and
impactful actions.
Governments worked to strengthen legal frameworks, investigated and prosecuted terrorism
cases, increased regional cooperation and information sharing, and addressed critical border and
aviation security gaps. Countering and preventing violent extremism in partnership with civil
society also became a priority for many countries. ASEAN member states consolidate their
efforts and since 1997 where the ASEAN Declaration on the Prevention and Control of
Transnational Crime was signed in Manila took place they were more than 20 other documents
consist of declarations, Memorandum of Understanding, Plan of Action and counter terrorism
programmes and activities upheld by the member countries. Not to mentioned there were
numerous Joint Exercises that was agreed upon under ASEAN and ASEAN Regional Forum
(ARF) and other relevant avenues that provided cooperation in term of combating terrorism.
There were doubts on the credibility and the role of ASEAN in providing the best platform to not
only mitigate or combat terrorism but on its stance as a regional organizations as according to
Sarah Eaton and Richard Stubbs (2006), neo-realist are generally skeptical about the
Associations role in the region because they view it, along with multilateral organizations more
generally, as peripheral to great power politicking On the same note, Donald K. Emmerson
(2005) tried to invoke a two different understanding of ASEAN by quoting Estrella Solidum, a
5

Philippines political scientist. According to Emmerson, in Solidums eyes, security in Southeast

Asia was indelibly an ASEAN product. Security was the enjoyment of the ASEAN values of
peace, economic, social and cultural development, cooperation, political stability, and regional
stability and progress. To illustrate this definition, she cited:
(a)

ASEAN entities and gatherings, including the ASEAN Regional Forum, ASEAN
Senior Officials Meetings, the ASEAN Secretariat, and the ASEAN Institutes of
Strategic and International Studies whose Track Two diplomacy brought
officials in their personal capacity together with non-governmental experts to
discuss regional problems; security, community, and democracy in southeast asia
(b) ASEAN documents, such as the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (1976) and
the Hanoi Plan of Action (1998); and
(c) ASEAN concepts such as the ASEAN Way whose norms and rules were
mutual- restraint and low-key behavior and the non-use of force, noninterference in each others domestic affairs, and mutual respect. (pp. 203204)

From Solidums account, the inference is clear: ASEAN is a security community in the full
causal sense. ASEANs members enjoy regional security because of the normative community
that ASEAN has created.
Again Emmerson stated the different view of David Martin Jones, a professor of government in
Australia formerly resident in Singapore. He expressed a different view:
ASEAN is neither a security nor an economic community, either in being or in
prospect. It is, in fact, an imitation community [comparable to a fake state whose
insecure and illegitimate leaders, ensconced through bogus elections or military
coups, wield unrestrained power over those whom they rule]. Such insecurity
translated to a regional level produces a rhetorical and institutional shell. The
shell delivers declarations, holds ministerial meetings, and even supports a
secretariat, but beyond the flatulent musings of aging autocrats or postmodern
constructivists pontificating in Track Two fora nothing of substance eventuates.
However, because Southeast Asias political elites along with their academic
6

fellow travelers have invested so heavily in ASEANs alternative [non-realist]

security discourse, it is regarded as impolite to point out [the Associations]
essentially ersatz quality.)
Adding to that, Jones wrote that the Association increasingly resembles other failed postcolonial
Cold War organizations like the Non Aligned Movement, the Organization of African Unity and
the Arab League (Donald K. Emmerson,2005). Even though there were many opinions about
the credibility and efforts undertaken under ASEAN, one can take notice on the cooperation and
efforts taken under ASEANs counterterrorism cooperation.
Cooperation between domestic law enforcement and judicial authorities throughout Southeast
Asia, including in Thailand, Indonesia, Australia, and Malaysia, resulted in high numbers of
terrorism-related arrests and, in many cases, successful prosecutions. Moreover, as a result of the
Philippine governments strong and continued pressure, terrorist groups including U.S.designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations such as the Abu Sayyaf Group, Jemaah Islamiya, and
the Communist Party of the Philippines/New Peoples Army; and other militant groups such as
the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF), were unable to conduct major attacks,
although sporadic fighting did displace locals.
Nevertheless, despites the incidences that occurs in 2015 alone, the region remained a target for
terrorist group recruitment and its movement. They were major incidences recorded as were
reported in the Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 by U.S States Department, the 4 main states
were Philippines with the most reported incidences and followed by Malaysia, Thailand and
Indonesia. In Philippines, there were dozens of small arms and IED attacks, kidnappings for
ransom, and extortion efforts by suspected members of terrorist groups. In Indonesia, 3
civilians, a member of the Police Mobile Brigade (Brimob) and a member of the Indonesian
military (TNI) were all killed in separate incidences and are allegedly conducted by Mujahidin
Indonesia Timur (MIT). In Malaysia, militants allegedly from the Philippines and linked to the
Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) kidnapped two Malaysians from a restaurant in Sandakan, eastern
Sabah, Malaysia and one of them was beheaded due to ransom payment. In Thailand on
February 1, two pipe bombs exploded outside a popular shopping mall in Bangkok, and on
March 7, a small grenade detonated at a courthouse in Bangkok. Both incidents resulted in no
casualties. On August 17, an explosion in Bangkok killed 20 and injured more than 120 at the

Erawan Shrine, a downtown tourist destination popular with Thai and Chinese tourists. On
August 18, a second explosion occurred near Saphan Taksin, a pier popular with tourists, but
did not result in any damage or casualties. (U.S State Department Country Reports on
Terrorism 2015). Judging by the incidences that were mentioned briefly, the act of terrorism

ignited from the struggles and support for the Islamic States of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and
the Middle East terrorist organizations.
3.0 Research Questions
There are many arguments on the effectiveness of ASEAN being a regional multilateral
organisations. Some call it a talk shop and some believe that ASEAN with its noninterfering norms would not be able to manifest their objectives objectively. Eventhough
there are many cooperation measures that are underlined and being implemented,

the

questions whether ASEAN provides the necessary platform to mitigate the threats of
terrorism is still questionable. With more than 20 documents that were signed to combat
terrorism and extreme violence among member states, the act of terror still continue to exist
and has increased in the past 10 years. Therefore what are the loopholes existed in the
cooperation that does not address the real situation that is happening on the ground.
The research questions would be:
Primary Question
1) Whether more engagement in bilateral and multilateral counter terrorism measures can
decrease the threats of terrorism in South East Asia;
Secondary Question
2) Whether ASEAN under APSC is an effective mechanism in providing platforms for
counter terrorism efforts as compare to other security platforms or bilateral engagements
only.
4.0 Research Objectives
This research would like to :

1) To determine and find the best methods on the many aspects of cooperation to counter
terrorism that were implemented by ASEAN member states; and
2) To provide an analysis on the impact of counterterrorism cooperation amounting to the
success of combating, mitigating or preventing the threats and influence of terrorism in
South East Asia.
5.0 Research Design
In order to describe the relationship between the cooperation on counter terrorism and its impact
towards the possible threats by terrorist, the research needs to give emphasis on each member
states cooperation measures particularly as stipulated in the B.4.2 of the ASEAN Political
Security Community Blueprint, ASEAN Convention on Counter-Terrorism (ACCT) and
ASEAN Comprehensive Plan of Action on Counter-Terrorism There is no doubt that todays
counter terrorism efforts via bilateral and multilateral arrangement provides avenue to create
cooperation but there are few questions need to be addressed as to what extent does the
cooperation manage to mitigate and eliminate the possible threats of terrorism in the region? And
on the extend of cooperation that exist between ASEAN member states via bilateral, or
multilateral aspects that manage to strengthen the ASEAN community building objectives. These
queries can be answered later by the explanation on the correlations between independent and
dependent variables as below:
Independent Variables

Dependent Variable

Counter Terrorism
Cooperation in ASEAN

Bilateral engagement

Multilateral approach

Other mechanism via

ARF, EAS and UN

Effectiveness of ASEAN in
Counterterrorism
Cooperation

Impact on Terrorism
Activities
1) Arrest
2) Deterrence
3) Threats
4) Influence

6.0 Assumptions
7.0 Literature Review
8.0 Methods
In order to analyse and to explain the relations between the cooperation on counter terrorism
and its impact on terrorist threats in the region, this thesis will apply two different research
methods: document analysis and in-depth interview.
The first method that will be applied is document analysis method. Documents analysis
means that this thesis will use several documents to analyse levels of cooperation and the
threats in hand. The information incorporated into study will cover both primary and
secondary sources. The primary sources comprise the government reports and brochures,
parliamentary reports, transcripts of agreements and speeches from various leaders and
statistical data. The data collected also includes material from both foreign ministries
websites and electronics journals. Research into foreign ministry files and national archives
in both ASEAN member states will be undertaken. The leading newspapers and news
agencies will be researched.
The second method that will be employed is in-depth interview which means conducting
interview with important actors that will help to understand the situation better. The
interview includes some of Malaysia governmental representative in Malaysian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs particularly Southeast Asia Regional Centre for Counter terrorism
(SEARCCT) and its counterparts all over the region, Ministry of Home Affairs, ASEAN
Secretariat in Jakarta, APSC liason head in Jakarta, and other related agencies.
This thesis using in-depth interview method because it need to get an assessment over
ASEANs perspective, particularly people who have direct access or who are involves in the
formulating and implementing the counterterrorism efforts as opposed to the existence
researchers with are mostly relied on the content analysis method in the region. Furthermore,
the interviews will also help to prove the assumptions that addressed in this thesis.

10

9.0 Theory
Constructivism- community building, norm,sovereignty, shared value
10.0

Significance/ Limitation

11.0

Scope

12.0

Chapterization

According to Omer Taspinar, 2009, the root cause of terrorism and violent radicalism are
extremely complex, multifaceted and often intertwined. The debate about the root cause of
terrorism, however is not about counter terrorism. Root cause approach is about the fighting of
the conditions that create terrorism, not the terrorist themselves. In order to find the truth about
what motivates and drive radicals and terrorist, Souad Mekhennet, a correspondent at the
Washington Post had a chance to interview one of the young leaders in ISIS, Abu Yusaf. He
sums up his interviews with a notion of, it is not the religion that has radicalized them, they have
radicalized the religion. According to Souad Mekhennet (2016), Abu Yusaf who were born and
grew up in Europe with immigrant parents felt that the Western world has always been unjust in
their treatment to Muslims immigrant. His parents dreams of giving him a better future and
freedom as opposed to their unfavorable condition during the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan was
put to rest when he chose to favor radical rebellion in the Middle East. Why so? Why did he
abandon the freedom, the lifestyle and the future that his parents had given him? Even so
question arises on not only what makes him choose the life of a terrorist but also how did they
find him? To a certain extent, Western governments as well as jihadists share responsibility for
these trends in radicalization, which are shaping the militant movements of the future.

11

References

Adam D. Tyson.2011. De-radicalization in Indonesia: Discource and Strategies, SEARCCTs

Selection of Articles Vol. 2/2011: 27; SEARCCT, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Malaysia
Amitav Acharya, 2005. Do norms and identity matter? Community and power in Southeast
Asias regional order, The Pacific Review, Vol. 18 No.1 March 2005: 95-118;Routledge
Taylor & Francis Group LTD
Bilveer Singh .2011, Why Successful Counter-terrorism can begetmore terrorism? Indonesia
Since the 2002 Bali Bombings, SEARCCTs Selection of Articles Vol. 2/2011: 1-15;
SEARCCT, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Malaysia.
Colin J. Beck . 2009. State Building as a Source of Islamic Political Organization, Sociological
Forum, Vol. 24, No. 2, June 2009
Donald K. Emmerson. 2005. Security, Community, and Democracy in Southeast Asia:
Analyzing ASEAN, Japanese Journal of Political Science 6 (2) 165185: United Cambridge
University Press 2005
Eli Berman.2009. Radical, Religious and Violent: The New Economic of Terrorism; The MIT
Press; 2009
Jun Honna. 2015. Contextualizing Global Governance of Counterterrorism: ASEAN-Japan
Cooperation in Southeast Asia From Rizal Sukma and Yoshihide Soeya, eds., Navigating
Change: ASEAN-Japan Strategic Partnership in East Asia and in Global Governance
(Tokyo: Japan Center for International Exchange, 2015)
Paul J. Smith (nd) , Terrorism in Asia Confronting an emerging challenge, Harvard Asia
Pacific Review
Leonard Weinberg.2013. Democracy and Terrorism: Friend or foe. Routledge Taylor & Francis
Group LTD: London and New York
Sarah Eaton and Richard Stubbs,2006. Is ASEAN Powerful? Neo-realist versus constructivist
appraoches to opower in Southeast Asia, The Pacific Review, Vol.19 No.2 June 2006:135-15;
Routledge Taylor & Francis Group LTD
Thomas Koruth Samuel.2012. Reaching the Youth: Countering the terrorist narrative,
SEARCCT, Perpustaan Negara Malaysia.
Walter Enders and Todd Sandler 2012. The Political Economy of Terrorism.2006 ed 2012.
Cambridge University Press.
ASEAN Political-Security Community Blueprint

12

U.S States Department Country Reports on Terrorism 2015

ASEAN Document on Counter Terrorism

13