Geopolitical Developments in Asia Pacific Region: Expect Rising Militancy - Part 2 BA Hamzah1

The return of Russia to the international scene has complicated the security situation in Europe and the Middle East (where it maintains a strong military presence in Syria). The threat from Russia may be felt in the region where it maintains some residual security interests. Europe is scared stiff of Russia following its invasion of the Crimea and sightings of Russian submarines in the Baltic and North Sea. The UK blamed Russia for the use of nerve agent (novichok) against a double agent at Salisbury, England, in March 2018. The UK-Russia diplomatic rift has widened to include the NATO and twenty-one other countries (European, US, Canada and Australia) who have expelled Russian diplomats in support of London. In retaliatory move, Russia expelled 150 Western diplomats, including 60 diplomats from the US.

President Putin’s unveiling of two new nuclear delivery systems in March 2018 that he claimed could evade detection and hit target anywhere in the world is frightening. Russia’s invincible warheads could be Putin’s response to the new US Nuclear Posture Review calling for the modernisation of its nuclear weapons “to preserve a credible nuclear deterrent”.

Taken together, this policy posture will make it very difficult to effectively roll-back any nuclear proliferation effort (both vertical and horizontal). The immediate impact will be to send conflicting signals to North Korea and probably “encourage” some states (Japan and South Korea) to go nuclear.

North Korea’s offer of olive branch should not be taken as a pinch of salt although it is too early to assess the outcome of recent developments in the Korean Peninsula. We need time and more concrete evidence of genuine reconciliation before we can celebrate. Hopefully the North/South Korea summit on 27 April will take place as planned. While the date for Kim Jun Un’s meeting with President Donald Trump has not been confirmed, their diplomats have been secretly talking to each other preparing the ground work for the summit. Any effort to reduce tensions in the Korean Peninsula can have a positive impact on the security of the region.

The weakening of Asean’s cohesion in the face of changing externalities and domestic politics are likely to have an impact on regional security. For example, issues like US-China rivalry in the South China Sea, a remilitarised Japan, an inward-looking US, China’s Belt and Road investments (BRI), and the expulsion of some 630,000 Rohingya are likely to be divisive. However, it will be interesting to watch how the diplomats from ASEAN countries deal with these controversial issues. While I am confident the “Asean Consensus” will survive the test again, the lingering undercurrents may further impact on Asean cohesiveness as each member state adjusts to the changing regional geo-political power balance.

Non-traditional Security (NTS) Challenges

Other non-traditional security challenges to regional security that feed into the new geopolitical dynamics may include the following:

The adverse impact of global climate change. The global climate change will take a toll on regional security and affect the pattern of global sea- borne trade. The melting of ice at the Arctic has opened a new shipping route (the Northern Sea Passage) that will cut down transhipment time (from Europe to Japan, for example) by one third, by-passing the critical waterways like the Straits of Malacca and Lombok.

Twenty sixteen has been declared as the hottest year in the last 137 years. The rise in global temperature and the warming of the sea will a debilitating impact on, for example, the global food chain and access to fresh water. Scientists have linked the intensity of natural disasters with climate change. In the last two years alone, our region has witnessed a number of volcanic eruptions in Bali, Sumatra, Taiwan and most recently Papua New Guinea.

The people in the Philippines who were struck by Hurricane/Typhoon Haiyan in 2013 are still picking up the pieces from the disaster. When a disaster of the magnitude Typhoon Haiyan strikes, it calls for the mobilisation of the entire regional resources. The questions to ponder include: Are our scientists able to provide a timely forecast of the event? Are we ready to handle the next regional disaster that could strike anywhere in the region? If not, what should we do together?

I observe that lately the military is often requested to help with natural disasters mainly because it has the resources not available to civil societies. Planes, ships and heavy machinery are standard equipment in the military. The question that defence planners have to address with regard to dealing with natural disasters is our preparedness-in term of training, post-disaster management and equipment. Usually no military in the world prepares for national disasters because it rides against their ethos. The military is established for war-fighting purposes.

Nonetheless, because the military is so often deployed for life-saving purposes, it needs a special budget for the purpose. It is incumbent for the Governments in the region to provide the military with a special budget to cater for contingencies like natural disasters.

Rise of nationalism, xenophobia and right-wing politics in Europe may find their way into our region. Some scholars have pointed to the rise of nationalism in China, Japan and other states in the region. What can we do to nip the problem in the bud? Should the ailments inflicting European politics find their way here, be rest assured they too will undermine the fragile “peaceful balance” among some societies in Southeast Asia. Like wild fire, such flame of hatred will engulf the whole region through family ties, cultural, ethnic as well as religious orientations that we share in the region. Militancy will not decline and remain a thorn in the flesh in dysfunctional societies in our region.

Some countries in SEA have seen the rise of militancy. I distinguish militancy from terrorism. The latter is only the tool of the trade. Terrorism and violence is their trade mark or business model. As why some parts of the region are more “susceptible” to militancy has been the subject of many intellectual discourses. However, like piracy, the problem of political violence is endemic in human societies. Hannah Arendt and Ted Gurr, among others, remind us that removing the root of political violence like militancy in human societies has been an unending challenge. Despite all effort, the world has not been able to rid of political violence and to think that we can eradicate militancy is like day dreaming of eradicating poverty from the world!

We can, however, mitigate the impact of shared challenges of militancy and extremism in the region with good intelligence and working together to nip-it-in the bud. The importance of regional collaboration to address the shared challenges of militancy and violent extremism needs no emphasis. A Regional Research Centre on Militancy, staffed with experts from all over the world will be a step in the right direction, in my view. The challenges to establish the Centre are funding and sustainable political commitment.

Apart from the current mechanisms of sharing intelligence and experience on militant activities in the region, we have defeated the insurgency and irredentist movements before. We have also cooperated to quell militancy in South Philippines and managing the problem of sea robbery in the Strait of Malacca. Unfortunately, in my view, our success stories at Marawi, Philippines, defeating maritime violence in the Sulu Zone and in the Straits of Malacca, for example, have not been widely known. The region should use the success stories in defeating militancy and violence as case studies in our respective institutions of higher learning.

There are unconfirmed reports suggesting that the mercenaries who survived the conflict in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan may return to the region to “offer” their services. A few battles- hardened criminals have returned to incite troubles, terrorising some communities in the region.

Why the region has become a magnet for militancy remains a question mark. However, most studies show NO single factor can explain preference for militancy. Poverty did not drive Osama Ben Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri to lead the Al Qaeda. Neither education becomes an obstacle to militancy. A number of Malaysian militants who died in Indonesia, the Philippines, Syria and Iraq were well educated. For example, Dr Azahari Husin, a demolition expert has a PhD in Engineering from a British University and Dr Mahmud Ahmad killed at Marawi was senior lecturer in a local University.

[1] Adapted from a lecture.