IS democracy the best defence against terrorism? This was the theme of a forum organised a few weeks ago by the Islamic Re­­naissance Front.

All the distinguished speakers, including Prof James Piscatori and Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa, agreed that democracy, with all its flaws, is pre­ferable to dictatorships. Demo­cracy has an elective system of govern­ment. It allows peaceful change of power. It respects human rights. It allows grievances to be aired. Discussion before decision is an essential prerequisite of a democratic set-up. In contrast, terrorism is a failure or absence of dialogue.

In a functioning democracy, as opposed to a facade democracy, the media, the judiciary and parliament exist to check the political executive. The weak are protected against the strong by a system of rule of law. Democracy shuns extreme ideo­logies and aims to be inclusive.

Regrettably, the gap between the theory of democracy and its existentialist realities is immense. The electoral system, for example, is one of democracy’s failed dreams. Elections often return dictators, ra­cists and plunderers to power.

Around the democratic world, the power to make critical decisions has shifted from elected governments to clandestine oil lobbies, pressure groups, media barons, capitalist elites, bankers, arms merchants and the military-industrial complex. The “deep state” has replaced the Constitution, the legislature, and the democratic decision-making process.

The close link between democracy and unbridled capitalism produ­ces massive economic disparities and eco­­nomic marginalisation of mi­­­­no­ri­ty and indigenous groups. Demo­cra­cy is good for incremental reforms but is generally incapable of structural systemic changes be­cause of the electoral power of en­­tren­­ched supporters of the status quo.

One must wake up to the horrible fact that almost all wars and ter­rorist activities are fomented, fuelled and financed by arms merchants who have a vested interest in clearing old stockpiles and manufacturing and selling the latest deadly collection of weapons of mass destruction.

Sadly, the economies of many democratic and authoritarian societies prosper on the export of despicable and often illegal arms and ammunitions.

This is not meant to defend or condone the perfidies of terrorist groups like the Islamic State in the Middle East. Terrorism must be condemned in all its forms, no matter for what purpose – religious, economic or political. Anyone whosoever, whether a misguided suicide bomber and lone ranger or a state sponsored outfit, must be brought to book under domestic and international law.

What needs to be pointed out, however, is that many powerful, democratic nations like the United States of America, Israel, France and Britain are the abettors, financiers and supporters of terrorist activities around the world.

International law is powerless to bring them to book. Evidently, democracy at home is not incompatible with horrendous acts of mass violence abroad.

War is the worst form of terrorism and there are democratic nations addicted to war. Western-led conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Palestine and Yemen are clear examples. Then there are drone attacks, extra-judicial exterminations of suspected militants and bombings by the USA of about 30 nations since World War Two.

In Third World thinking about the definition of terrorism, illegal occupation of the territory of other nations, regime changes by force, overthrow of democratically elected but unfriendly governments, military support of insurgent groups and economic blockades to starve people of the necessities of life are all acts of terrorism.

The selective definition of terrorism that distinguishes between lone ranger terrorism and state terrorism must be rejected. Political and economic terrorism are no less nefarious than terrorism inspired by extremist religious ideology.

So understood, any random, arbitrary act of violence that puts large populations in fear of life or deprivation of the basic necessities of existence or destruction of their shelters is an act of terrorism.

Many democratic nations of the First World are therefore guilty of the perfidies they seek to stamp out in their “war against terrorism”.

What should the civilised world do in the face of such hypocrisy? There are no simple, cure-all solutions. We must seek to understand the causes of terrorist attacks. Some are purely ideological and need to be combated by reformulating our educational system.

Some terrorists are reacting to real or perceived injustices. They decide to die on their feet than to live on their knees. We need to understand the root causes of their discontent.

International law needs to curb the murderous trade in arms and to make suppliers of weapons criminally liable for their complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity. It is a “known secret” that the military industrial complex is a central player in all wars and terrorist activity.

We need to discuss and debate this “elephant in the sitting room”.

Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi is Tunku Abdul Rahman Professor of Law at University of Malaya. The views expressed here are entirely the writer’s own.



