So Uncle Sam is back in our backyard. The announcement that an 'anti-terror centre' is about to be set up by Asean and hosted by Malaysia of all countries has been greeted with approval by some so-called 'strategic analysts' here in the country.

Believing that whatever assurances that have been given so far are 'credible' and that the activities of the centre will remain within the 'scope and areas of cooperation' as laid out in the Asean-US Joint Declaration for Cooperation to Combat International Terrorism signed on Aug 1, these analysts would have us believe that the US is about to embark on yet another one of its international military adventures for the purely altruistic reasons.

These claims come at a time when flying pigs have been spotted over Malaysian airspace, which probably accounts for why tourist flights to the Asean region have diminished slightly.

That the Americans have decided to put their money on Malaysia as the 'model moderate Muslim state' in Washington's unilateral 'campaign against global terror' should not strike any of us by surprise. America has, after all, been playing the role of elder sibling to its 'little brown brothers' here in Southeast Asia since the 1940s.

Lest we forget, America's re-entry to Southeast Asia is not without historical baggage of its own: America has been actively involved in the domestic politics of practically every Asean country.

It was the United States that helped to prop up the ailing South Vietnamese government, even when it was obvious that the ruling elite was falling apart and the South Vietnamese government had no credibility whatsoever in the eyes of its people.

America was likewise involved in all kinds of political chicanery in Burma and Thailand, supporting various military factions whenever it suited their interests.

It was the United States that helped to wipe out the leftist-nationalist movement in the Philippines in the 1940s, with the aim of installing their own puppet leaders like Ramon Magsaysay and Diosdano Macapagal.(1) Later on Washington was the strongest supporter of the dictatorial government of Ferdinand Marcos, another one of Washington's cronies in Asean whose brutality was matched only by his wife's extravagant taste in clothes and shoes.

We should also remember that it was the US, through the CIA and its other covert intelligence bodies, that helped to engineer the brutal massacres of the leftist-nationalists in Indonesia in 1965 and which led to the rise of Asean's longest-serving dictator General (later President) Soeharto. The US was also the most steadfast ally and supporter of the dictatorships in Philippines and Indonesia, supplying arms and training to their various covert and psy-ops units that were working for their interests during the Cold War.

And let us not forget that when Indonesia annexed East Timor in 1975 at the point of a bayonet, the US (and other Western countries like Australia) were willing to look the other way, lest East Timor fell into the hands of a leftist government and allowed itself to become the 'Cuba of Southeast Asia'.

Active US presence

Those who think that the proposed 'anti-terror centre' that Washington wants to set up in Malaysia is a novel idea should think again. A closer reading of Malaysian history would show that the US has been present here in Malaysia since the end of the Second World War, and that Uncle Sam's boys have been actively working in the background for some time now.

America's gradual entry into Malaysian politics came unnoticed at the beginning. This was because most of their activities were carried out in secret, behind the smokescreen provided for them by that other imperial power, Britain.

In the wake of WWII, Britain realised that it would not be able to hold on to its colonies in the East. The impending independence of India and Burma meant that the old imperial power would soon have to cut its commitments to its colonies east of the Suez Canal.

But Britain was not too worried about the loss of its empire: Its rival France was just as spent and it could always rely on its 'natural ally' the United States to take up some of the slack.

As Britain withdrew its forces from the East, the way was opened for America's entry into the political vacuum that was left behind. In September 1945 the British Military Establishment (BMA) was set up in Malaya and it was this military authority that effectively ruled the country until the end of March 1946. Tagging along with the British at the time was a detachment of security and intelligence personnel from the American Office of Strategic Services (OSS) which arrived to survey the political terrain in the region.

The American agents were based at the offices of the OCBC bank in Kuala Lumpur, close to the Chinatown district of the capital where they could observe the activities of the Chinese political movements there.

Among the American OSS agents based at the OCBC building were Brig General RC Pape and Lieutenant JW Smith. It was at the OCBC office that the OSS agents attempted to lure members of the Malayan Communist Party (MCP). The OSS (with the help of the Malayan intelligence expert CC Too) managed to win over the communist leaders like Chan Tai Chee. Though small in number, the American presence in Malaysia was destined to be a long-lasting one.

From the 1950s to the present, the US has been a key strategic ally to Malaysia and both governments have been working closely behind the scenes. This is a fact admitted to by none other than the Minister of Defence, Najib Abdul Razak during his talk at the Heritage Foundation earlier this year (2) when he pointed out that "for many years US and Malaysian forces have cooperated on a wide range of missions with virtually no fanfare or public acknowledgment".

Najib went on to say that "I very much appreciate the chance the Heritage Foundation and the Centre for Strategic and International Studies have provided for me to reveal this well-kept secret" (3).

The defence minister noted that "Malaysia has been a steady, reliable friend to the United States" (4) and that "our common interests include trade and investment on a sizeable scale and security operations on a wide range of fronts" (5).

Malaysia's willingness to play the host to the Asean anti-terror centre therefore comes after decades of close cooperation. The trouble is, this latest initiative has been made public and will invariably entail political costs that are higher.

The second front of the war

Southeast Asia has now been designated the 'second front' in the so-called 'war against terror'. Just what and who the enemies are in this global conflict remains unclear, as no single government in the world (including the US) has been able to give a final definition to the word 'terror' itself.

What is worse, the governments most keen to embark on this global war against terror have also been the ones least inclined to accept the fact that terrorism can also be perpetrated by states against their own peoples or other countries. (The United States happens to be the only country in the world that has been accused of using terrorism and sponsoring terrorism abroad as a tool of its foreign policy by the UN General Assembly.)

To add insult to injury, the governments of Asean are now falling over each other to comply with Washington's requests, in order to ensure that they remain in the good books of Washington, Wall Street and the CIA. Thus far we have witnessed the governments of the Philippines and Indonesia bending over backwards to accommodate whatever demands from the powers that be in the White House.

The gains made after Indonesia's reformasi struggle have all been undermined by the new wave of repressive laws and legislation agreed to by its president, Megawati Sukarnoputri. Likewise the erosion of civil liberties in the Philippines has rendered null and void the positive developments that came in the wake of the popular peoples movement in the 1980s and 1990s.

Malaysia's decision to accept Washington's suggestion to create an Anti-Terror Centre here in the country should therefore be read with such geopolitical, strategic and economic factors in mind. Never mind what some so-called 'strategic analysts' may tell you, the factors of realpolitik are the ones that have really determined the decisions of the leaders of Asean.

Coming at a time when economic recovery is still precarious and there is growing competition in areas such as the service industry, the governments of Asean are keen to ensure that they do not upset foreign investors and/or tourists coming to the region. Here it is the economic carrot that happens to be bigger than the stick of political or military coercion.

Risks too high

But for Malaysia in particular, the move will carry with it risks that will certainly outweigh the benefits (if, indeed, there are any benefits). For a start, it must be remembered that the biggest opposition grouping in the country are still the Islamists who have their own deep reservations about the role the US has played internationally and in the Arab-Muslim world in particular.

Islamists movements worldwide have every reason to be sceptical about the intentions of the US. It was, after all, the US who helped to prop up a number of hugely unpopular Arab-Muslim regimes ranging from Anwar Sadat in Egypt, King Hussein of Jordan to the Shah of Iran. Likewise, Muslims the world over know that the US has been the primary supporter of the Zionist regime in Israel, and that Washington continues to turn a blind eye to the excesses of the Zionist regime (whose own acts of terror have gone unnoticed it seems).

In the wake of Sept 11, the US government has led the way in the 'crusade against terror' which for many Muslims rightly or wrongly is seen as an all-out campaign to demonise Islam and undermine Muslim concerns the world over. Despite the 'assurances' given by Washington (which some 'strategic analysts' here in Malaysia seem to believe in blindly), no visible efforts have been made to get to the root causes of terrorism and violence themselves, which lie in the uneven power differentials between North and South, East and West. The root causes of Arab/Muslim anger have also remained unaddressed.

Instead Washington has merely been mouthing glib paeans and songs of praise to its trustworthy allies who have done their bidding and have helped the US consolidate and normalise its international profile further.

The immediate political costs of Malaysia's latest move should be clear to most sensible adults. Overnight, Malaysia's image as a leading Muslim state in the eyes of Muslims the world over will be compromised as Malaysia will join the ranks of the other compliant Muslim states like Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Arab states that have jumped on the anti-terror bandwagon.

Locally the political costs will be equally high: Coming as it does at a time when the government's own Islamist credentials are at an all-time low (a fact made worse thanks to the Islamisation race initiated by the government itself since the 1980s), the ones who are most likely to exploit this latest move will be the Islamist opposition who will merely use it to attack the government's reputation even further.

(To underscore this point one only has to look at the results of the latest elections in Pakistan, where the Islamist opposition parties managed to exploit the groundswell of public anger and frustration against the Musharraf government which was seen as leaning too close to the US and Western interests. The elections resulted in the unprecedented victory of the Islamist parties in many constituencies.)

For those concerned about the steady erosion of human rights and fundamental liberties, the developments here in Malaysia and the rest of Asean are also a cause of worry and concern.

If the anti-terror centre is to focus on intelligence gathering and cooperation between the various intelligence agencies, what will this mean for fundamental rights and freedoms such as freedom of speech and association? What will the impact be on local opposition movements and NGOs in the region as a whole? Already we have seen how legitimate opposition movements have been demonised and labelled 'terrorist groups' in Indonesia and the Philippines. What will happen to the opposition movements here in Malaysia? one wonders.

One big happy family

These are some of the questions that the so-called 'strategic analysts' have failed to ask, let alone answer. In their mad rush for peace and security, the liberals of Asean have shown their true conservative colours. Fearful that some indiscriminate attack might jeopardise their personal safety and comfort they have been willing to sell their freedoms to an even more powerful international security apparatus whose policing of their private lives and political activities will be wholly discriminate instead.

So now we are all one big happy family: Uncle Sam is in the house, and the Uncle Toms are busy catering to his every whim. Anyone who thinks that the so-called 'cooperative relationship' between Washington and Asean is an equal one should have his head examined: The power differentials between the developed Western countries and the developing world remain concrete realities to be dealt with.

If you believe otherwise, just give a call to the occupant to the White House and suggest that a Malaysian-sponsored 'anti-terror centre' should be set up in the US to counter the threat of errant snipers or homicidal teenagers with guns.

Endnotes:

  1. America's return to the Philippines after World War II was the first stage of a long, drawn-out campaign to impose their political will on Filipino society. The first obstacle the Americans encountered was the Philippine Communist Party (PCP) which had been formed in the 1940s and had fought against the Japanese alongside the Hukbalahap (People's Army Against Japan) that was formed in 1942.

    But the Americans were not happy with the PCP and the Huk rebels, and made every effort to undermine their efforts to fight off the Japanese occupiers. In the post-war period, US forces helped to re-install traditional Filipino leaders and the feudal elite, who were used in the campaign to undermine the Huk forces.

    Between 1945 to 1947 the Philippine-US Trade Act and Philippine-US Military Agreement were passed. The latter provided the Americans with 23 military bases in country, and the lease was meant to last for 99 years. The Joint US Military Advisory Group (JUSMAG) helped to reorganise the Philippine intelligence services, and put their man Ramon Magsaysay as its new head. Magsaysay would later be elevated to the position of president of the Philippines, with the help of the US and its covert intelligence units in the Philippines.

  2. See: Najib Tun Abdul Razak, US-Malaysia Defence Cooperation: A Solid Success Story. Heritage Foundation Lectures No 742. Heritage Foundation.

  3. Ibid.

  4. Ibid.

  5. Ibid. The minister listed some of the joint activities and operations that have been conducted so far. They include: "more than 75 US military ship visits in the past two and a half years. The United States conducts training exercises with the Royal Malaysian Air Force, flying with and against them in mock battles. The US Navy SEALS conduct training in Malaysia twice a year. The US army does field exercises with the Malaysian army. I might mention here that, for their expertise in jungle warfare, Malaysians are known in the business as 'whispering death'. Finally, 1,500 Malaysian defence personnel have benefited from the US-sponsored IMET (International Military Education and Training) program".

Dr FARISH A NOOR is a Malaysian political scientist and human rights activist. 'The Other Malaysia' tries to unearth aspects of Malaysia's history and culture that have been erased or relegated to the margins in order to remind us that there remains another Malaysia that is often forgotten.