Categories
Conflict & disaster Photography Society

[2806] Do not blame the innocent refugees

This was back in 2011 in Paris. I was there at the height of the Arab Spring and also interestingly, during the emergence of French far-right parties in mainstream politics.

20110129Paris

I do not have much or anything new to say. It is late here in Kuala Lumpur, six or seven hours ahead of Paris. Yet, I still want to express my opinion that we should not discriminate or blame the innocent refugees for the horrible acts committed today in Paris by a group of Islamist terrorists.

I am angry at the attack and I am sure a lot of others do, especially in Paris. The senseless killing is outrageous whatever the excuse. But I am also angry at the mistrust the attack is creating everywhere.

I am disgusted reading responses from right-wingers who somehow think the refugees from Syria and elsewhere from the Arab world as causing of the Paris attack. The right-wing xenophobic policy recommendation is to stop the refugees from coming in.

But as many have highlighted, these refugees are running away from the same barbaric Islamic State which attacked the civilians in Paris today. These refugees are civilians too and they are as much a victim as Parisians.

The right way is to direct the anger towards the Islamic State, and not at the innocents who just happen to share, nominally if I might add, the same religion at the attackers.

Categories
Conflict & disaster Personal Society

[2428] How September 11 2001 affected me?

I have told this story many times to friends.

I just woke up from sleep. It was sometime between 8AM and 9AM. My first semester at Michigan. The first or the second week of class. Chemistry class was due at 10AM. Or really, ten after ten. It was Michigan time, you see.

I needed to print some notes and check my email before class. So, I came down from my room and saw a notice on the door of the computing lab at the basement of the Michigan Union. There was a national emergency, it said. The office was closed. I had no idea what the emergency was about.

I logged on the computer, went on Yahoo! and saw a burning World Trade Center. This must be a hoax, I told myself. It was too outrageous to believe.  I dismissed it.

I was young, barely 19, and was still processing what was going on.

I went to class anyway, not wanting to miss anything. I rushed across the Diag, on a possibly clear blue morning.

There was none to be had. The professor was there and the class was a little bit more than half-full, but everybody came to realize something bigger was happening. The Twin Towers had collapsed. Class, dismissed.

Elsewhere, there were talks of repercussion. Friends through emails were warning of backlash against Muslim students. That also included most Malaysian students in the United States. There was fear.

I had heard of stories of xenophobia elsewhere, but I did not suffer from it throughout my 4 years as a Michigan undergraduate. Not ever. Maybe it was the liberal nature of Ann Arbor compared to some other parts of the US, but never once I became a victim of xenophobia.

The weeks and months following the attack formed lasting impression of the US society in my mind. It was one of admiration. There were fierce debates throughout the years about what was right and what was wrong. But the society itself survived the illiberal tidal wave that threatened individual liberty. Coming from a relatively, very much closed society that prevailed in Malaysia then, the societal dynamic of the new world was enticing and refreshing. I was impressed at the US society despite all the criticisms against it.

It was in the US where I found my values.

I have always said that I became a libertarian because of my experience in Michigan. Now, I think I became a civil libertarian because of the September 11 attack. I did not have a label to point at then, but in retrospect, I knew September 11 was the seed for me.

I saw how a free society can regulate itself and overcome fear and distrust. There was little prejudice around even after the attack to completely unravel the argument that a free society will self-destruct, an idea that was prevalent in Malaysia, and maybe still is.

And I saw how freedom needed to be defended from fear and distrust. I saw friends were forced to report to the Department of Homeland Security in Detroit regularly, just because they came from certain countries. Every time I needed to board the plane, the security team would select me for extra screening, just because I am a Malaysia. I took that as racial profiling and I despised that. It was insulting.

That too, strengthened my view on racial discrimination.

I visited New York later in 2002. I visited the site of the World Trade Center. It moved me.

September 11 was not just some event that happened on the other side of the world. It happened on my side of the planet. It deeply was personal.

Categories
Society

[2358] An individualist response to Ioannis Gatsiounis

I watched a documentary once. It was about Muslims in America. There was a young female Muslim in New York with typical American lifestyle. She was not the conservative type and I am on confident of that. She did wear a scarf though and that probably tells you that she identified herself with Islam.

In one segment, she said she did not feel the need to come out in the open to condemn terrorist acts done by some Muslims in the name of Islam. She said she was not responsible for it and she would not apologize for others. They happened to share the same religion as her.

I am in complete agreement with her. I am not because I am trying to defend the religion and Muslims at large. I have grown to be so much a skeptic in the past few years that I am more likely to criticize religion, any religion for that matter, than to defend it.

I am in complete agreement with her because there is a mark of individualism in that statement.

More importantly, the individualism is very much libertarian. We are responsible for our own actions and no one else. Each one of us is responsible for our own actions.

It is for this reason that I do not buy the narrative that moderate Muslims must come out to condemn terrorism or any wrongful act done by fellow Muslims. I disagree with what Ioannis Gatsiounis wrote at The Malaysian Insider today, where he wrote that the Muslim community needs to express “collective expressions of joy and relief of bin Laden’s death” to help combat the suspicion that Muslims are quietly sympathizing Osama Bin Laden and his merry men in Al-Qaeda.[1]

And then, guilt by association is a fallacy, after all.

No doubt, there are Muslims who sympathize with Bin Laden. That however does not negate the individualist argument. Those Muslims are responsible for their own positions. Other Muslims theirs, as with other individuals regardless of beliefs out there in this world.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — Your initial reaction to news of Osama bin Laden’s death is telling. If you were disappointed, you no doubt harbour terrorist sympathies.

Of course, many non-Muslims have come to suspect many Muslims have been doing just that at least since 9/11. That impression may be inaccurate. But with repeated silence among moderate Muslims in the face of countless acts of terror committed in the name of Islam since 9/11, it’s easy to see why the suspicion arises [Hope for Islam’s image with bin Laden’s death. Ioannis Gatsiounis. The Malaysian Insider. May 3 2011]

Categories
ASEAN Conflict & disaster

[2083] Of reaction to the death of Noordin Mohammed Top

Death is always unpleasant for life is always too precious to waste. Hence, I greet the death of Noordin Mohammed Top with a kind of bitter sweet feeling. Part of me regretted it while the other half is happy to learn that regional terrorist network has lost an important figurehead.[1]

His ideal is disagreeable and the mean to his end is even more disagreeable. His death is a testament of the idiom those who live by the sword will die by the sword. Noordin chose that path and he knew it. He violated the non-aggression axiom and by doing so, he legitimized effort taken on his life by others hurt by his actions.

I do not know how this may affect terrorist activity in the region but hopefully, it means reduced probability of attacks in Indonesia. I have mentioned that I have high hope for Indonesia to spearhead democratic change in Southeast Asia and become the symbol of aspiration for all liberal democrats in the region. If indeed the death of Noordin leads to a more stable Indonesia on average, then the development of a democratic Southeast Asia — and really, I am first and foremost concerned with democracy in Malaysia — comes one step closer to fruition.

Apart from that, I do hope the death of Noordin would build a new bridge between Malaysia and Indonesia. It is in this sense that I am most glad that Noordin is now dead. The recent spat between Malaysia and Indonesia has been damaging to regionalism in Southeast Asia. His destructive action has been raised by angry Indonesians as a Malaysian product. Malaysia exports terrorism, as some Indonesians accuse Malaysia.

This is most unfair because the Malaysian government and a majority of Malaysians, as I believe, do not support him. Yet, he was a Malaysian and that is undeniable and that is an embarrassing fact for me to admit, especially to foreigners and to my Indonesian friends.

Nevertheless, a torn is now gone.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — ASIAN terrorist mastermind Noordin Mohammed Top, the man responsible for plotting the 2002 and 2005 Bali bombings, has been killed during an Indonesian police raid against suspected Islamist militants in Central Java.

Top was one of four people who died during the raid yesterday on a militant hideout near Solo, Indonesia’s police chief, Bambang Hendarso Danuri, confirmed last night.. [Bali mastermind Noordin Top killed in Indonesian raid. The Australian. September 18 2009]

Categories
ASEAN Conflict & disaster Liberty

[2044] Of a liberal democratic Domino Theory

Indonesia can be an important factor in the creation of a liberal democratic Malaysia.

Its sheer size, its proximity to Malaysia and deep ties that bind both countries prevent any pretension that our developmental path is independently of each other. It is for this reason that recent liberal, democratic, and economic advancements in Indonesia are a cause for celebration among liberals and democrats in Malaysia. For the same reason, the latest bombing in Jakarta should be a source of concern for them.

Indonesia’s transition from an authoritarian state to the most democratic one in the region has been nothing less than impressive. The violent manner of the transition is less than ideal but it was a transition for the better nevertheless. With all else being equal, Indonesians are potentially set to reap the dividend of democratic peace and progress. Already its economy has been growing consistently above 4 per cent since 2000. Furthermore, the archipelagic country is still growing despite the ongoing crisis that has forced many others, including Malaysia, to go into recession.

I celebrate the much talked about progress in Indonesia, first and foremost, because of the ideal of a liberal democracy. That is the only form of government that is supportive of individual liberty. Only that system is capable of balancing individual liberty against state power as well as any majority power. It guards individual liberty tightly against the ugly side of gross majoritarianism: tyranny of the majority.

To have one more state — in the case of Indonesia, a major state — embracing liberal democracy as a system, and having it working, enhances the influence of the idea all over the world. To have one more state as a liberal democracy further gives credence to the statement that the most successful countries in modern times, by and large, have been liberal democracies.

A point that is more relevant is the effect of Indonesian progress on Malaysia. Its success as a liberal democracy is important to Malaysian democrats and liberals because if Indonesia, during this period of its liberal democracy, can achieve unprecedented socioeconomic progress to catch up with Malaysia, it can provide Malaysia with a liberal democratic model to follow.

This is an important point that demands stressing. It provides a strong alternative to the development model preferred by the government of the People’s Republic of China. For Malaysian democrats and liberals, between deep statism as practised in mainland China and democracy, the answer does not demand too much mental manoeuvring.

This idea may in a way parallel the Domino Theory in a restricted sense. The Domino Theory in its original form postulates that if one country fell to communism, others in the region would fall to communism too, just as a domino piece in a well-arranged deck only waits toppling after the fall of the first piece. Except this time around, the force that pushes the first piece sits on the opposite side of communism, and decades after communism was ideologically defeated.

The liberal democratic Domino Theory could even affect Singapore. Any big change in Malaysia will affect Singapore, just as a big change in Indonesia will affect Malaysia. A liberal democratic Malaysia will present unwanted pressure for the Singapore establishment to be more flexible in matters concerning democracy and liberty.

For Singapore, in times when it is surrounded by illiberal states — Malaysia and Indonesia that from time to time presented a cold front to it — it can find allies in other liberal democracies in the West, even when Singapore itself is an illiberal state. When, and if, it is surrounded by liberal democracies, Singapore’s ties to Western liberal democracies would somewhat diminish as attention would shift from Malaysia and Indonesia’s record to Singapore’s.

On top of that, liberal democracies tend to be noisy about illiberal conducts. If the governments of Malaysia and Indonesia are unwilling to do so, then the civil society in both countries would. Consequently, the domino deck would exert strong pressure on Singapore to democratise and liberalise.

Before that can happen, Indonesia must make significant progress. Without that, Indonesia will not have a significant role in democratising and liberalising Malaysia and give currency to the theory. One barrier to that progress was exemplified by the recent bombing in its capital.

What happened in Jakarta is disheartening because it can adversely affect confidence in the country. Confidence is a precious commodity in the making of a successful economy. Without it, Indonesian economy can falter to undo the progress made on the political front. Without a healthy economy, a liberal democratic Indonesia will not command respect from others. That will easily cancel out the possibility of the Domino Theory.

Thankfully, the bombing so far has not significantly impacted the Indonesian economy. It may be that the momentum of progress there is so big compared to the negative impact of the bombing. If that is so, that is great. Yet, one may never know what is in store next.

An Indonesia in chaos will not only remove an external factor that catalyses the realisation of a liberal democratic Malaysia, it can also contribute to a setback. Indonesia after all is not so far away and it has been pointed out that the network of terrorism consists also of Malaysians. These Malaysians may target Malaysia some day.

If ever that happens, it is likely that individual liberty in the country will suffer further erosion. In the United States, with its strong tradition in liberty and credible institutions, a strong challenge against the transgression of liberty can be mounted by its civil society. In Malaysia with smaller cache as far as the idea of liberty is concerned, the same challenge will be hard to mount. After all, laws irreverent to liberal democratic values introduced during the Emergency era are still in place. For instance, when was the last time Malaysia held a local election?

For Malaysian democrats and liberals, it is in their interest to ensure that what is in store for Indonesia is peace instead of chaos. They can do this by requiring their own government to cooperate earnestly with the Indonesian government on the matter of anti-terrorism. Successful cooperation will lessen the possibility of Malaysia facing such attacks at home and avoid the oft-mentioned dilemma between liberty and security.

The dilemma between the two is a false one, since liberty requires protection to remain firm. That, after all, is the purpose of a liberal democracy. But convincing the masses of that reasoning will be a difficult task during dangerous times. With an illiberal government at the helm, the government will certainly make use of that opportunity to rob liberty from individuals, either consciously or indirectly.

The cause of terrorism is clearly multifold but I am convinced that poor economic conditions — which in turn affects other factors like good education that are crucial in sustaining a liberal democracy — play a large role in it. A developing Indonesian economy can address that, and that makes the progress in Indonesia all the more important; economic success is the real anti-terrorism measure.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

First published in The Malaysian Insider on July 27 2009.