In the wake of the American attacks, we have increasingly heard a series of outcries denouncing terrorism by the US government and the need for more American action against these "evil doers" and "enemies of freedom and democracy" who now threaten the Americans' "way of life."

We have heard Bush cry that merely bringing the perpetrators to justice will not be enough but his goal will be to totally to dismantle and uproot these terrorist networks and woe those who stand in his way or even think of sympathising with them.

If you're not with us, you're against us, they have said. America has decided to check the spread of terrorism, especially that of Muslim fundamentalists and to contain them at all costs.

Does this sound familiar? If we are to flip back our history books to the cold war, and read American foreign policy in most of Latin American, Iran, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and the rest of the world, then replace the word 'communism' with 'terrorism', and Soviet Union with Al-Qaeda (Osama's network) we will find many similarities.

In a nutshell, America, during the cold war polarised the world into us (free) and them (communism). In the name of freedom and democracy, America toppled democratically elected governments with leftist sentiment, invaded nations, funded rebellions against governments with a hint of socialism, started civil wars, supported military dictators who agreed with them, and where military might failed, strong armed their way by withholding much needed foreign aid. Though in the name of democracy, most of these interventions also resulted in economic gain,increasing America's economic hold on these countries (think Gulf war, United Fruit Company, etc.). Cold war gunboat diplomacy was many a times, dollar diplomacy as well.

Now America speaks of containing the spread of Muslim terrorism, possibly in the same manner it contained communism. Already governments like Pakistan have agreed to 'cooperate' with America, Musharaf knowing very well that not to do so will mean his rule will be greatly undermined.

But what does this mean to us? To South East Asia? Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines and Brunei contain significant Muslim populations. Some of these countries already have Osama cells or militant Muslim groups active in their soil. They are clearly in Indonesia and the Philippines, and if the press is to be believed, Malaysia.

Indonesia is especially alarming - with a huge population, a severe economic downturn, political corruption and astronomical unemployment, it is a hotbed for fundamentalist activity. Predominantly Muslim and encompassing countless islands, it has the geographical advantage for terrorist activity not unlike that of Afghanistan's Hindu Kush mountains.

Already, sporadic violence has occurred.

Though Malaysia does not have the same problems as Indonesia or the Philippines, it is currently in the wake of a reformation movement that is pushing PAS, a Muslim party to the forefront of opposition. There is clearly a growing cynicism of BN, and a gaining of momentum in grass root support for PAS. (This is not unlike the liberal land reform uprising against conservative rulers in Latin America that caused much alarm in the US)

If America decides to fight terrorism the way it fought communism, then we are a region bound for American intervention and interference. Does this mean we will see American gunships and destroyers near our shores, ready to overthrow a PAS government, if they, perchance, win the next elections?

No, probably not. But there is a high chance that America will now seek to undermine groups or governments that are sympathetic to Muslim fundamentalism. If we are to use the same half hazard,alarmist judgement America used during the cold war to determine who is sympathetic or not, then we have reason to worry that PAS will fall under that category.

Will we see closer ties between our government and the US against these 'fundamentalists'?

America has strange bedfellows when it comes to fighting a war.

I'm not for or against PAS. But I am certainly against American interference in other countries' internal affairs. I am wary of America using any excuse to interfere, be it the "Red threat" or the "Terrorist threat".

I am wary of the added instability in the region that will come with American covert missions or its aid to contra groups. American meddling in any country can only profit America.

The Malaysian government (and other governments) must remember that American help to defeat its political enemies will only bring economic and political dependence, as it has in many countries.