Island Voices
Bali Bombing Alters Regional Calculations
Australia and the U.S. Now Face Asia-Pacific Terrorism
 |
|
|
The car bomb in Bali that killed nearly 190 people poses a major new problem for the Indonesian government that could have devastating consequences if handled badly.
For the beleaguered government of President Megawati Sukarnoputri, already fighting to handle a staggering economy and multiple internal security problems, as well as to rebuild its relations with donor countries, the bombing is a devastating event. Given the government’s political weakness, this attack could give further ammunition to groups that can profit from chaos.
- ADVERTISEMENT -
At least four different groups could have had a role in the car bomb that exploded next to a tourist nightclub in mid-October. In addition to the immediate prime suspect—the international terrorist al-Qaeda network—Indonesian Islamic radicals, rogue military elements and various forces trying to undermine the Megawati government could have been involved. Indeed there are so many individuals and groups in this picture, with so many different agendas and interconnections, that we may never know the full story behind the bombing.
Further, even assuming that the Indonesian government can identify the perpetrators, dealing with them could be a very delicate—even dangerous—matter.
If al-Qaeda is responsible, this will be an embarrassment for the government, which to date has staunchly denied an al-Qaeda presence in Indonesia and demanded concrete evidence (for example in response to Malaysian and Singaporean intelligence reports placing al-Qaeda operatives in Indonesian territory). If the government determines that al-Qaeda is in fact behind the bombing, this would both demonstrate the weakness of Indonesia’s intelligence and security agencies, expose the previous official evasions and present the even more difficult challenge of rooting out the al-Qaeda elements in the country.
Proof of involvement of local Islamic groups with connections to al-Qaeda would raise sensitive domestic political issues. While Malaysian and Singaporean intelligence indicates that Indonesian cleric and educator Abu Bakar Bashir is the spiritual, if not operational, leader of the radical Islamic Jemaah Islamiyah organization, which in turn is connected to al-Qaeda and terrorist plots, Indonesian officials say they have seen no evidence to support this allegation. After the government finally interrogated Bashir, Megawati’s vice president, himself the leader of the largest Islamic party in the parliament, defiantly hosted Bashir at dinner in his home. And Bashir has threatened that, if the Indonesian government goes after him, he will unleash his followers and wage jihad (holy war) against the government.
Bashir is clearly trying to wrap himself in the cloak of aroused Islamists and to use action against him as a way to bring down the wrath of Indonesian Muslims on the government.
If radical Muslims are angry at Australia and the United States, Indonesian nationalists are even angrier because of East Timor. There have been international demands that the Indonesian military hold its members accountable for the East Timor bloodshed. If anyone in Indonesia is organizing retaliation against Australia, military elements are more logical targets of suspicion than radical Muslims. Further, individuals with military expertise and connections have ready access to the kinds and quantities of explosives used in the Bali bombing.
Finally, the perpetrators could include individuals interested in embarrassing and weakening the Megawati government in advance of the 2004 presidential and parliamentary elections—for which the maneuvering and (informal) campaigning are already well underway. Indonesian domestic political competition is a labyrinthine affair even in ordinary times; in the aftermath of this dramatic security crisis the competition is likely to become even more intense.
On the other hand, President Megawati Sukarnoputri, who has generally been considered a weak leader, has proven in the past that she can take very strong stands on issues of principle. If her reaction to the bombing in Bali is forceful, this might galvanize leadership we haven’t seen before. Indeed, her early responses to the bombing suggest that she intends to follow the evidence wherever it may lead. This could yet provide a silver—or at least gray—lining to the very black cloud of the bombing tragedy in Bali.
