Countering Terrorism in Maritime Southeast Asia: Soft and Hard Power Approaches

Abstract

There are two main approaches in the global war on terrorism (GWOT). On the one hand, the hard approach entails physical engagements which cripple destructive plans by terrorists, such as bombings. Through the legislative, judiciary and executive arms of the state, the modern state uses methods such as arrest, surveillance, intelligence and detention to cripple damaging initiatives by terrorists. The soft approach, on the other hand, attempts to debase terrorist ideology through a counter-ideology discourse against radical ideologies which encourage political violence. Through the soft approach, Muslim organizations and leaders debunk terrorist’s ideology of hate and violence. This article attempts to elucidate efforts made by governments, and of particular interest are contributions made by Muslim leaders in maritime Southeast Asia to counter the ideology and activities of terrorism.

Boko Haram Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism: The Soft Power Context

“…In the context of this article that focuses on religious terrorism, radical Islam or jihadism is the ideology of many religious terrorist groups. These extremist groups feel that the rich heritage and independence of Islam has been diluted by infidels (Aljunied, 2012). It is worth noting the uniqueness of Islamic terrorism in comparison to secular terrorism.…”

“…Soft power approaches, including political engagement and capacity building contributed to Hezbollah's path to peace in Lebanon leading to its disarmament and engagement with the politics of the state. Similarly, Aljunied (2012) states that a soft power posture to counter-terrorism efforts entails two critical issues. The first is identifying and deploying significant individuals within the state to dampen the terrorist ideology, while the second is employing a multilateral diplomacy by drawing on the assistance of other states to tackle terrorist acts.…”

“…To diminish the group's appeal to the younger population, the war on ideas is as important as the war on terror. The use of Islamic clerics and institutions has been effective in South East Asia, particularly in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore in forestalling extremism (Aljunied, 2012). Thus, Islamic clerics can play a meaningful role in the counter-terrorism narrative.…”

“…This entails among other things, capacity building, economic development and an effective counter-narrative to the terrorists’ narratives and ideologies. It also involves a concerted effort to provide public education including mobilising leaders and religious organisations to challenge the ideology and violence perpetuated by terrorist organisations and providing counselling and fatwas (Aljunied, 2012).…”

“…Most studies on terrorism and counter-terrorism have focused on the violent manifestation of this phenomenon. However, there is an emerging literature that explores non-violent attributes and the significance of soft power in terrorism and counter-terrorism operations (Aljunied, 2012; Grossman, 2015; Levitt, 2006; Rineheart, 2010). In the case of Boko Haram, while there has been an attempt to engage with the various counter-terrorism approaches that have been employed by the Nigerian government (Montclos, 2014; Nwankpa, 2017; Onapajo, 2017; Sampson, 2016), there has been no deliberate and detailed effort to engage the group’s soft power and the utility of soft power in the government’s counter-terrorism efforts.…”