|
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Paper presented by Terrorism Research Center Director Caleb Lister Temple in Arlington, Virginia, at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies' "Counter-terrorism Strategies for the 21st Century: Asian and Pacific Basin Perspectives" conference, August 26, 1999 (EDITOR'S NOTE: A full two years and two weeks before 9-11) .
By CALEB LISTER TEMPLE Terrorism in Asia poses a significant challenge to local governments, their populations and U.S. interests. Several countries currently suffer from continuing attacks by long-standing insurgent groups, and over the years terrorist groups in Asia have been responsible for a relatively high number of terrorist attacks and resultant casualties. Some attacks by Asian terrorist groups, such as the spectacular 15 October 1997 bombing of the Colombo World Trade Center in Sri Lanka by the
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
which killed 18 and injured more than 100 persons, are as shocking as they are destructive.
Sadly, levels of terrorism in the region recently have been higher than most other parts of the world, In 1998, terrorists conducted 49 separate attacks in Asia, killing 267 persons and wounding another 368. These numbers were surpassed only by terrorist attacks in Africa last year, the location of the 7 August 1998 attacks by
Usama Bin Ladin
against U.S. embassies
in Kenya and Tanzania. Attacks and casualties in Asia have continued in 1999.
While violent extremist groups pose a direct challenge to Asian governments, they also directly and indirectly threaten U.S. interests. The U.S. Government's list of 30 foreign terrorist organizations includes five Asia-based groups: the
Abu Sayyaf Group
,
Aum Shinrikyo
, the
Harkat ul-Ansar
, (also known as the
Harkat ul-Mujahedin
), the
Japanese Red Army
and the
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
.
Within the region, secular guerrilla groups, such as the remnants of the
Khmer Rouge
in Cambodia, continue to intimidate and attack civilians. The dwindling
New People's Army
in the Philippines was also active in 1998, conducting a series of bombings against rural police posts. While once widespread and deadly, the
Khmer Rouge
,
NPA
, and others like them are not fairing well since the collapse of their ideological lynchpin, the Soviet Union.
Ethnic rebels, such as Sri Lankan separatists, also continue to engage in political violence against local authorities and civilians. The
LTTE
poses a significant security challenge to the Sri Lankan government, and specializes in suicide bombings and the assassination of Sri Lankan government officials.
Security problems continue in India due to continuing insurgencies in Kashmir and the northeast. In the past, Kashmiri militants have attacked villages and murdered rural civilians. Political violence has also been an unfortunate hallmark of Indian elections in the past.
The Japanese doomsday cult,
Aum Shinrikyo
, is looking for new members, and relies on internet solicitations and a complex web of businesses according to local media sources.
Aum Shinrikyo
, which was responsible for a sarin gas attack in a Tokyo subway in 1995, has also expressed anti-U.S. sentiments, it also apparently believes the world will end in the next couple of days. Another Japanese terrorist group, the
Japanese Red Army
, is in decline with several members arrested in Lebanon in February 1997. Their conviction in Lebanese court was upheld last year.
Finally and perhaps most challenging, extreme interpretations of Islam -many of which advocate violence--seem to have taken root and are spreading in both the Southeast Asia and the subcontinent. Violent Islamic movements in Southeast Asia include the Thailand-based
Pattani United Liberation Organization
, the Philippine
Moro Islamic Liberation Front
, and the
Abu Sayyaf Group
, which allegedly had connections to New York World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef.
Of particular concern for the United States are Islamic extremist groups in South Asia.
Over the last several years, several Islamic groups in this region, to include Saudi terrorist
Usama Bin Ladin
who is currently hiding in Afghanistan, have threatened or attacked U.S. citizens.
In July 1995, the Pakistani-based
Harkat ul-Ansar
kidnapped a U.S. citizen and five others in Kashmir.
In April 1997, unidentified gunmen murder four U.S. businessmen in Karachi, Pakistan. Two groups claimed the attack was in retaliation for the conviction of Pakistani national Mir Amal Kasi for murdering two CIA employees and wounding three others outside CIA headquarters in 1993.
In February 1998,
Usama Bin Ladin
used his Afghan hideout to issue a fatwa encouraging all Muslims to kill Americans everywhere.
Following the 20 August 1998 U.S. missile strikes against the
Zawar Ku al-Badr
terrorist training camp in Afghanistan, several Pakistani-based Kashmiri militant groups vowed revenge for casualties they suffered at the camp. In November 1998, for
Harkat ul-Ansar
and current
Harkat ul-Mujahedin
leader Fazul Rehman Khalil vowed to kill 100 Americans for each dead Muslim. In 1998, the leader of the Lashkar-l-Jhangvi party also vowed publicly to kill U.S. citizens and offered his support to
Usama Bin Ladin
.
The level of anger directed at the United States by several Islamist groups in South Asia continues today. In the last several weeks the leaders of the
Pakistani Jamat Ulema-i-lslami
party and the
Sepha-i-Sahaba Pakistan
both threatened to murder Americans living in Pakistan if the U.S. Government attempted to capture or kill
Usama Bin Ladin
in Afghanistan.
Asian governments, however, are fighting back. Military and police sweeps in the last two years have weakened both the Philippine ASG and the
Moro Islamic Liberation Front
. In December 1998, Philippine police killed ASG leader Abubakerjanjalani1 during a gun battle. Thai separatists were disrupted in 1998 by a series of arrests and unprecedented cooperation from Malaysia, previously a safehaven for Thai rebels. Sri Lankan authorities have participated in the U.S.'s Anti-Terrorism Assistance Program to receive investigative and forensic training and better hone their response to
LTTE
attacks.
Terrorist groups in some parts of the region, however, will likely continue to pose
a threat to stability and economic growth.
Copyright 2000 by Potomac Institute for Policy Studies. All rights are reserved.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Remarks presented by Terrorism Research Center Director Caleb Lister Temple in Arlington, Virginia, at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies' "Counter-terrorism Strategies for the 21st Century: Asian and Pacific Basin Perspectives" conference, August 26, 1999 (EDITOR'S NOTE: A full two years and two weeks before 9-11) .
MR. TEMPLE'S REMARKS:
First, let me please state that the views expressed in my comments are my own, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.
Moving on, let me also state that statistical analysis is both good and bad, and everyone knows you can make numbers do what you want. However, I've compiled some fairly interesting numbers that I'll put on the table to give us some ideas to think about. For my research I went back five years to find the number of terrorist attacks and the total number of casualties in the region. I researched numbers associated with the region for each year beginning in 1993 through 1998. I also compiled available 1999 data.
Let's start with a discussion of terrorist attacks. When you look at the overall number of terrorist attacks in the region, some interesting trends appear, especially in the last five years. From 1993 to 1998, my research revealed 158 acts of terrorism that occurred in Asia. Unfortunately this number in and of itself is meaningless. Without context or a baseline, we don't know whether that is a lot or a little. I needed a benchmark so, fairly or unfairly, I selected the Middle East region as an artificial benchmark of terrorist activity. I went back through 1993 to 1998, drilled down to the number of terrorist attacks in the Middle East region, and came up with a total of 374 during our time frame. By having comparable data, I was able to hold these two numbers next to each other and engage in analysis. Of course, a review of the numbers indicates Asia experienced approximately half the number of attacks that the Middle East region did during the same timeframe.
So Asia experienced only half the number of terrorist attacks in the Middle East. That appears to tell us something. It seems Asia is a relatively safe place compared to our randomly selected benchmark, the Middle East. But let's continue with our analysis. After deriving the attack numbers, I continued searching for data and began compile casualty figures for Asia and the Middle East. I defined casualties as persons injured and killed. Again, going back to the data from 1993 through 1998, and looking at the region as Afghanistan and points East, I compiled a total number of 8,331 dead or wounded from international terrorist attacks in the region. That's a large number. For my comparison, sticking with my original benchmark, I compiled the number of casualties resulting from acts of terrorism in the past five years for the Middle East, and found a total of 2,524 injured or killed. What's the conclusion? While Asia experiences only half the number of attacks the Middle East does, people are much more likely to get hurt in Asia. In the past five years, over three times as many people are killed or wounded from half the number of attacks in Asia. In plain language, attacks in Asia conducted by terrorist groups are extremely bloody.
Let me state clearly, I'm not a quantitative person by trade. But as I looked at the data, I thought I should apply some kind of sensitivity check to ensure my conclusions were solid. Being truthful with myself, I also knew that over 5,000 people alone -- over half the total number in the region -- were injured in a single act of terrorism: the March 1995
Aum Shinrikyo
terrorist attack in Tokyo's subways. That's a spike, an anomaly. I decided to take that casualty data out to get a better trend analysis. I subtracted 5,000 dead and injured from my casualty number for Asia for the past five years, and I came up with a total of approximately 3,331 persons dead and injured. That's still more than in the Middle East. In the final analysis, even excluding the Tokyo subway
Sarin
attack in March 1995, Asia still suffered more casualties from terrorism cause by half the number of attacks, as compared to our artificial benchmark, the Middle East region. Once again, after taking out anomalies and getting down to statistical relevancy, terrorism in Asia is bad. It's bloody, it's mean, people get hurt and they die.
At this point, I'll leave my discussion of relative levels of attacks and casualties, and highlight some other interesting findings. Overall terrorist-related statistics demonstrate that the number of terrorist attacks around the world -- the lump sum final number of worldwide terrorist attacks -- has decreased over the past several years. Casualty figures, however, have risen. This is a dangerous trend. It basically means terrorists are increasingly seeking to punish or kill their enemies, in addition to making a political threat, demand or statement. In terms of Asia, while I was conducting my research I noticed an ominous trend. Beginning in 1996, Asia bucked the worldwide tendency. As the overall number of terrorist attacks from year to year continued to decline around the world in general, the number of attacks in Asia -- beginning in 1996 -- began to rise. Attacks in Asia rose from 11 in 1996 to 21 in 1997, and 49 in 1998. This trend continues to support my assessment that terrorism in Asia is particularly dangerous. Based on apparent trends, I can't help but see more terrorist violence in Asia in the near to mid term.
At this point, hopefully I've provided a complement to our earlier overview, a kind of a quantitative "flip-side" to the previous survey of terrorist groups in Asia. If I may take a bit more time, I'd like to indulge in a couple closing comments. We've seen kind of a shift in focus among terrorist groups, especially from the U.S. perspective. The days of viable secular, Marxist terrorist groups are behind us. The
Khemer Rouge
and
New People's Army
are still around, and there's still some violence going on. Further, in terms of special interest terrorist groups or terrorist cults, I think the ,
Aum Shinrikyo
is still a big question mark and may reconstitute itself sometime in the future. But
I think the real focus -- the challenge for the future -- is going to be some of the transnational Islamic terrorist groups out there. Transnational Islamic terrorist groups like
Usama Bin Ladin
and other, like-minded organizations in the region pose a grave threat to the United States, and threaten the stability of countries in Asia, especially South Asia. Events in South Asia, especially the extremist rhetoric coming out of the smaller, religious militant political groups is frightening. Everybody's entitled to his or her perspective, but when you've got extreme rhetoric coming from a couple of small, fringe groups in Pakistan, combined with what we've seen in the past in terms of violence directed against Americans and others in Pakistan -- like the March 1995 shooting of three diplomats or the 1997 murder of four oil executives -- you've got a potentially dangerous situation and the potential for tragedy.
I'm concerned about Asia, and am hoping for dialogue and good faith among groups and governments. These developments could ease tensions and marginalize terrorists in the region. Regretfully, I'm not optimistic in the near term about terrorist violence, especially in South Asia. At this point, I'll close my remarks.
Copyright 2000 by Potomac Institute for Policy Studies. All rights are reserved. |
|
