The biggest terrorist bomb after 9/11 was the Bali Bombing in Indonesia on 12 October 2002 killing 202 people and injuring 300 others. The mastermind behind this bomb was Imam Samudra and very luckily, we have a book written by him (in Indonesian unfortunately) so that we can check the thinking behind this ideologue.
Fortunately, this paper gives a good synopsis of the book, compares it with the Al-Queda ideology and proposes some counter terrorist recommendations. Besides some bad grammar, spelling and formatting of the paper, I am not that enamored of the conclusions, but the contents are what are very very interesting. (Compare this with the book written by Dhiren Barot - watch this blog for the forthcoming post, waiting for some bits!). But see the main sections here which I quote liberally:
To reach a concrete understanding on the Bali bombing I operation, Imam Samudra stresses the need to first understand the stages of jihad according to the understanding of the Salafush-Shalih (pious predecessors). In his elucidation of the subject, two reference books are specified, namely the Tarbiyah Jihadiyah by Sheikh Asy-Syahid Abdullah Azzam and Tafsir Ibnu Katsir,
Imam Samudra holds that the words fitnah and din are to mean one must "fight against them until there is no more polytheism and so that the excellent religion of God that is Islam prevails over other religion."
Imam Samudra accepts that armed jihad is one of many forms of dakwah (Islamic propagation). However, in the face of the Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims onslaught against Muslims and their lands such as in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Kashmir, and Chechnya, he despises those who choose the path of dakwah as a means to defend and uphold the teaching of Islam. He views those who choose the peaceful means as defeatists. They do not understand the comprehensiveness of Islam and have deviated from the path of the Salafus Soleh (the pious predecessors).
Jihad as Fardhu Ain
Imam Samudra argues that jihad today is not just obligatory but a fardhu ain (personal obligation) upon every single Muslim. This is because the classical Muslim scholars ruled that if an inch of a Muslim's land is seized then it become incumbent to all Muslims to liberate it through armed jihad. In today's context, Imam Samudra argues that there are plenty of Muslim lands that remain occupied by non-Muslims such as Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir, and Mindanao. Because people of the respective lands are not able to repel the enemy by themselves, Muslims all over the world are to render their hands and participate in jihad against the occupying forces.
Because the main target of the Bali bombing is the United States and its allies who are guilty of attacking the helpless and innocent Muslims in Afghanistan in 2001, Imam Samudra argues that they deserved to be attacked. In his interpretation of the following verse:
And fight against those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God, all together - just as they fight against you, [O believers,] all together - and know that God is with those who are conscious of Him. (The Quran: 9:36)
he equates the United States and its allies as those whom the Quran refers to as the musyrikeen (polytheists). In his opinion, war must be waged against them in retaliation for what they did. To him, the verses previously revealed on the musyrikeen are applicable to the United States and its allies. Therefore, Imam Samudra views that it is appropriate to use the verses as basis for Bali bombing.
Basic Rule: Killing or Attacking Civilians is Forbidden
Imam Samudra acknowledges that it is forbidden in Islam to kill women and children, destroy crops, as well as killing those who are old and those who devote their entire lives in worship.
However, he asserts the rule only applies when the enemies themselves do not transgress the rule. If the United States and its allies do not attack and kill Muslim civilians and observe this limit, the mujahidin will go to war in adherence to this basic rule
Civilian Targets
In the case of the Bali bombing, Imam Samudra argues that the concept of civilian immunity as prescribed by Islam does not apply to the victims because the targets are:
Military conscripts, whether in active or reserve duty. He mentions in particular civilians from the United States, Australia, Singapore, and Thailand;
Citizens of hostile countries who are guilty of voting and paying tax to the government, acts he considered as contributions to war against Islam and Muslims;
Unlikely to be civilians because they still travel to Bali despite various threats of attack. Those "civilians" are well aware of the situation in Indonesia as various warnings about terrorist attacks have been issued by their respective countries. He argues that such a hostile condition would frighten any ordinary civilian. What more, when there were already a few bombing cases reported? Would it then be logical for the "American civilians" and their allies to choose Indonesia for a visit? Defying such threat clearly demonstrates that they are in fact not civilian as claimed when the attack on 12 October 2002 took place.
Citizens of "colonial countries" who have caused the death of thousands of Muslim civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kashmir, Chechnya, and many other places.
Attacking Civilians from among the Colonial Race is a Fair and Just Act
Imam Samudra points out that the precedent for targeting civilians had been set by the following incidents:
In 1991, the trade embargo on Iraq initiated by America through the UN brought about the death of 600,000 babies and subsequently the figure rose to 1.5 million (Jakarta Post, 4 December 2002).
Thousands of civilian deaths as a result of the American embargo on Afghanistan during the Taliban rule (1994-2001).
Israeli's attack on civilians with the America's military and financial support.
Post the World Trade Center and Pentagon attack, America demonstrated its military might beyond words how brutal and ruthless they can be, driven solely by vengeance and hostility.
200,000 civilians were killed during the U.S. attack on Afghanistan as reported by www.khurasan.com.
Then the author goes about refuting this ideology, but that's pretty much par for the course. So this is really horrifying and worrying that one can have this kind of ideology which cant really be fought against, is there? Dont forget that Imam Samudra was a very very intelligent chap, he had loads of academic prizes for his achievements, had a very prestigious family, and was well connected into the global Jihad network.
JO - Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, AU - Hassan, Muhammad Haniff Bin, TI - Imam Samudra's Justification for Bali Bombing
PY - 2007, VL - 30, IS - 12, SP - 1033, EP - 1056
AB - The primary objective of this article is to provide a map of Imam Samudra's thinking behind Bali bombing I as written in his book Aku Melawan Teroris to those who are not able to read the book in its original Indonesian language with an assumption that counterideological effort cannot be executed effectively without understanding the ideas held by terrorism perpetrators. To add value, the article also offers a comparative study between Samudra's thinking and Al Qaeda's ideology. It then points out and provides brief alternative viewpoints to Samudra's thinking. The article ends with some policy recommendations pertaining to counterideological work.
No comments:
Post a Comment