THREAT OF TERRORISM

Debate resumed.

Mr R. Ravindran (Marine Parade): Sir, I rise in support of the motion moved by the Minister for Home Affairs.

Sir, the White Paper documents in detail the seriousness of the threat posed by terrorism to the peace and security of Singapore. That the terrorist threat is real and present is highlighted by many recent events in the region. The Bali bomb blast and the subsequent arrests of the personalities involved confirmed earlier information and intelligence that many were key JI leaders and operatives. The discovery of bombs, weapons and ammunitions in the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, showed that the JI movement and its associated ideological partners are operating in the vicinity of Singapore's security perimeters.

The confirmation of information that the JI attempted to purchase 21 tons of ammonium nitrate to be used as truck bombs in Singapore worries everyone. Further confirmation that some of the Singapore JI members had gone to Afghanistan, Mindanao and Indonesia for military training and were ready to serve as operatives to sabotage action in Singapore is a poignant reminder how lethal they are and how close they came to carrying out their plans. We also know that many local sites were carefully selected for destruction of both lives and properties. They were surveyed and matters had progressed to the planning stage.

Further confirmation that two of the Singapore JI members had hands-on experience in bombing civilian targets as shown in their participation of the Batam bombings on Christmas eve in 2000 is another important factor that is very worrying. With some key JI leaders like Hambali, Malaysian JI member Azahari Hussain and Singapore JI member Mat Salamat are on their run and have yet to be apprehended is also a cause for concern.

There are also many sleeper cells lying low and can be activated when required, as shown repeatedly by recent arrests in Indonesia and the Philippines. In fact, what is clear is that because the heat is on, many have gone underground in the region.

In fact, it is estimated that many of these JI members and their ideological partners are to be found in some of the pesantren in Indonesia, so much so that among the pesantren members, there is a feeling that what JI members and the ideological partners have done is right and not wrong.

Sir, in the light of what I have stated, I support the strong action taken by the Government against the Jemaah Islamiyah group and other militant and extremist groups in the region. I also support the many recommendations put forth in the White Paper in the three areas. Let me now focus on the three areas.

First, enhancing security measures. It is clear that the Al-Qaeda and its affiliated regional associates, like the JI, KMM, MMI, Laskar Jihad, have well educated and intelligent leaders and members who understand Government terrorist counter-measures, and accordingly target soft targets to achieve their goals. They pose a real challenge to the security forces in the region by adopting asymmetrical warfare as their modus operandi. In the aftermath of September 11, they have shown their creative side by targeting new targets in novel ways - explosives in shoes in an aircraft, surface-to-air missiles in Kenya, suicide boat bombs off Yemen, car and suicide bombs in Bali and many more. Stocks of ammonium nitrate discovered in Philippines and Indonesia clearly show that the preparatory materials for terrorism are always in place.

All these show that the terrorists we are dealing are on a class of their own. Our security forces have shown that they can deal with any class of terrorists and deter them with our counter terrorist efforts and measures. I thank our security forces and their services for a job well done.

Our security agencies must continue to address the security challenges thrown up by this new terrorism that is facing us. The creation of the Home Front Coordinating Committee to oversee the terrorist threat is a welcome move. Greater inter-agency cooperation and devotion of more resources are needed to check the threat in its formative stage. No doubt, many of these security measures will entail inconveniences and loss of privacy to many, but it is a price to pay for a safe and secure homeland. We must also continue with regional and international efforts and share intelligence to cripple the terrorist movement.

I am confident that the comprehensive range of measures taken to counter terrorism will help to deter terrorist acts in Singapore. Tighter border controls at the airport, causeways and ferry terminals entail great inconvenience, but we must accept these as the necessary price for a secure homeland. Of course, at times, we have misinformed and mischievous politicians in neighbouring countries who make frivolous and scandalous allegations when we conduct such searches within our territory.

Every Singaporean must not think that the Government will take care of the problem and go about their life complacently. As responsible citizens and residents of Singapore, all of us must be vigilant and alert and be on the lookout for matters which arouse our suspicion and alert the authorities. I am confident that collectively, Singapore can overcome the challenge of the terrorist threat. But that was only the hardware part.

Let me now move on to the software part, which is the second topic, policing the spread of terrorism and extremist ideology. Sir, the method adopted by the JI is that they start out as legitimate religious teachers and only later isolate the vulnerable ones and recruit them as cell members. The method of recruitment of JI in Singapore is well explained in the White Paper. One cannot also overlook the excellent details furnished on such recruitment practices which are contained in the ICG report dated 11th December 2002 on "How the JI Terrorist Network Operates".

The JI method of recruiting from an internal process within the Muslim community does pose a challenge for the Muslim community in what measures they should adopt to nip the problem in the bud. The JI leaders exploited the trust and respect that members of the Muslim community traditionally accord to religious teachers and scholars. And this is something which is also common in many other religions. The foreign terrorists also exploited the deeply felt sense of Islamic brotherhood among Muslims. The important factor that stands out is the involvement of foreign religious teachers. They stayed away from mainstream religious activities and kept to themselves. They also had a code of secrecy and they took an oath of personal allegiance.

The emergence of Political Islam and the extreme manifestation of Wahabism in the world are issues that need to be addressed within the Muslim community. To a casual observer, one cannot deny that there are changes that have occurred in our Muslim community. To assert that one has become pious and is now a true Muslim is a simple overt answer to thwart a deeper understanding of our Muslim friend's complex make-up today.

Mr Barry Desker in an article entitled "Islam and Society in South East Asia After September 11", published in the Australian Journal of International Affairs recently, summed it up crisply by stating that "there is struggle for the soul of Islam within the global Muslim community today". He states that "the small Islamic monarchy of Brunei and the significant Muslim minority populations in Thailand, the Philippines and Singapore are influenced by trends and developments affecting Muslims in Malaysia and Indonesia". He cites "that Islamisation race in Malaysia has resulted in the Islamic discourse domain being dominated by conservative ulamas and advocates of Wahabi austerity". The tidal wave of influence from our neighbouring countries has made inroads into our Muslim community. Where do we go from here?

I endorse the call made in the White Paper for greater cooperation of the Muslim community and the wider community of all Singaporeans.

I am heartened to note that both the Malay/Muslim MPs and the Malay/ Muslim organisations, together with the Malay/Muslim religious leaders, have come out to condemn the JI and its extremist agenda. I support their call that non-Muslims play a critical role by getting to know better their Muslim neighbours, workmates and classmates. I am equally inspired that MPs have urged the community to contribute in the mainstream and actively reach out to other Singaporeans to strengthen understanding and trust.

I am glad that MUIS has taken upon itself the task of regulating Islamic religious education and development. The online registration system and the formal accreditation system are moves in the right direction. I am confident that this measure will go to some measure in tackling the spread of extremist Islamic teachers and teachings and help identify deviant teachers and teachings.

One cannot deny that it is not an easy task to build consensus within the Muslim community in the light of the fact that just like many other religions, there are different schools of thought and differing interpretations of the holy text.

The crux of the issue facing the Muslim community in the area of religious teaching and the regulation of Islamic teachers was raised in an article by a Straits Times journalist, Mr Marfoot Simon, on 12th January 2003. He stated some of the difficulties:

(a) It was difficult to look out for individuals like Ibrahim Maidin as it is not easy to distinguish them at the registration stage.

(b) That the power to require the asatizah (religious teachers) to register does not exist within the power of MUIS and also that MUIS has no real authority to monitor and take the necessary action.

(c) He highlighted the weakness of MUIS in not having control over madrasahs or even their curriculum - save for one madrasah. He also raised the question whether the same fate will befall a MUIS-led regulatory framework for religious education.

Sir, it is perhaps timely to see whether we need to strengthen the hand of MUIS by making necessary legislative changes and also consider other ways to empower MUIS and the other relevant organisations to ensure that deviant teachers and deviant teachings are always in check.

Sir, it is clear that the Muslim community has its own set of problems and priorities to sort out just like all the other communities. If there is one thing that is clear, it is that all in the Muslim community, whether they are individuals or organisations, must work together and overcome the problem and challenge boldly. If they are unable to do so, there would come a time when there will be a call for the state to get involved to police religious teachings.

Sir, there are religious deviants and religious extremists to be found in all religions. History is full of them. They will claim divine and exclusive right to interpret their religions. Tackling them is no easy task. But not tackling them will only allow bigger harm to befall the wider community.

In that respect, the White Paper has starkly projected the challenge that all religious communities in Singapore will face at some stage of their development. It is a matter that I hope all religious leaders and groups will take heed and pay attention. If necessary, they should also build safeguards and monitor religious teachers and preachers in their own communities so that problems like the JI and extremist religious teachings do not surface among their flock in future.

Now, let me move on to the third topic, which is strengthening social cohesion and religious harmony. The vast majority of Singapore Muslims are moderate, tolerant and law-abiding, and they do not support the actions of the Muslim militants. The setting up of the IRCC and Harmony Circles can help in building better understanding and trust among the various communities. I believe that it is essential that all communities assess how they can create better bonding and better interaction between all races in Singapore.

There is an increasing number who think that Singaporeans from the various races are not interacting enough, although the official statistics show otherwise. Many are too polite to discuss the matter openly as they consider it a sensitive matter. If such a trend is true indeed, then I think all the communities have to share the blame for perpetuation of this negative trend.

A good starting point is to ask some pertinent questions:

(1) Are we truly interacting with people of other races? Do we harbour prejudices and do we pass these prejudices to our children?

(2) Do the different communities, as a whole, encourage interaction and an attitude of give and take or have we become too rigid?

(3) Do the minority communities sincerely try to accommodate the desires of the majority community? Does the majority community, in turn, sincerely encourage the same? Or is it a case of each community only desiring engagement on their terms?

(4) In the public domain, have we put sufficient effort to ensure that there is no room for all communities to participate and develop true bonds?

(5) Have some of our community's attitude changed to the extent that it is a futile effort to turn the clock? Is the religious and racial divide a temporary divide or is it a permanent divide?

It is important that we address these issues squarely as the answers to these questions will determine what kind of society we will evolve into and whether we are going to encourage more radicals or even terrorists, be it a Hindu, Muslim, Christian or a Buddhist one.

I asked a good Muslim friend what causes many of our Muslim friends to look to the Middle East and absorb Middle Eastern cultures, traditions and even dressing. His simple answer was that for the Malay Muslims, there is no history in Singapore beyond the period before Raffles. It is a sore point among the Malays but one that sometimes we overlook. They want to identify with a rich and proud tradition. They want their own rich heritage to identify with. The Middle East offers an alternative to them. But that package also comes with its own idiosyncrasies and others like Arabism and Arab political views, etc. But I saw the pride in my Muslim friends when heritage centres like the Lieutenant Adnan Centre was opened at Pasir Panjang Hill. They need more such icons and symbols and rich heritage to identify with.

Sir, the hon. Member, Mr K. Shanmugam, highlighted a few more reasons for the prevailing self-esteem among the Malays. These are subtle matters which are not discussed openly. But the problems are there. We must identify the pull and push factors that are prevailing in the Muslim community and take the necessary steps. Perhaps we can focus on these and work with them and help resolve them.

As an MP, I try very hard to get the various communities to mingle and bond. To community event organisers, I emphasise the importance of having multi-racial programmes, multi-racial participation, and to have programmes in the language that all Singaporeans can understand. Despite this, I am aware that many community organisations overlook the same. Just last month, my sister bought many tickets for her family for a RC block party near her home. Imagine, to her disdain, all the organisers had was karaoke singing in one language. I am quite sure that there are many more culprits out there. What they do not realise is that first impression counts for them. If increasingly community organisations ignore participation by all communities, then many will withdraw to their own communities and that will not augur well for our future.

But I am equally heartened that there are gems in our midst who are shining examples of those who help and work with different communities. The four Chinese gentlemen who contributed to help the JI members' families are one, and this was highlighted by the Minister yesterday. I was also heartened to see the Buddhist Lodge volunteers helping out during Thaipusam last week. There are many more fine examples.

However, it is equally important for the minority communities to be engaged and to participate actively in community events. Stay away at your own peril for history shows the necessity for interaction by the minorities. The majority can live without the minority, but the minority cannot do the same. So I would like to call on all communities to come forth and work together. Let us strengthen the Singapore Team.

On that note, I support the motion.

Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Mr Speaker, the White Paper on the Jemaah Islamiyah Arrests and the Threat of Terrorism brings into focus several issues, which have dominated much of the past year, both locally and internationally. Since 9/11, there has been much discussion about the threat of global terrorism by extremist Muslim groups, and the need for more moderate voices within the Muslim world. To some extent, the discussion has also centred on the faith itself. Being a Muslim and believing in Islam became the subject of intense scrutiny and, in some instances, even the receiving end of hatred and violence.

The arrests in Singapore of a group plotting violent terror and with links to other terrorist groups, both regionally and internationally, brought home a chilling reality, which all Singaporeans hitherto could not have imagined: that there are Singaporeans who are prepared to sacrifice innocent lives for their cause. For the Muslim community in Singapore, this is an entirely new phenomenon - the group's total disdain for the sanctity of human life is totally unfamiliar to the community. Nonetheless, this new phenomenon brought undue attention to the Muslim community here in Singapore. For the non-Muslim community, it was a test of their trust and faith in fellow Muslim Singaporeans. It was a difficult time for all Singaporeans.

Now, we have the White Paper - a report that puts into perspective these issues and provides enough clarity about the JI group and the threat of global terrorism to establish a rational basis for all Singaporeans to move on with their lives. The Paper has correctly defined the threat of terrorism as a national problem, which must be tackled by all Singaporeans. The Paper has also made it clear that the JI ideology and its exclusivist tendencies and millenarian orientation is but the belief of a small group of Muslims in Singapore. The Paper has also outlined steps to be taken by all groups and Government agencies to tackle the threat of terrorism. In view of this, is it possible for us now to go back to the pre-9/11 and pre-JI arrests days? Things cannot remain unchanged. What has happened cannot be erased. Negative impacts will take time to be addressed, or removed.

But, Sir, I am encouraged by the strong consensus shown in this House and by the public in general on the need to unite against the terrorist threat. There is a strong determination by everyone not to let this issue sow suspicion and destroy the bonds between Singaporeans. There is a recognition that greater security challenges are a given in the foreseeable future. There is a valid concern that the security threat is one, which also poses a challenge to social harmony. What will be critical is how Singaporeans pull together to overcome these twin challenges, so that we become more resilient as a people, and come out stronger and more cohesive as a nation.

Response of the Malay/Muslim community

The Malay/Muslim community and religious leaders are united in their determination to tackle these challenges. The responses of the various Malay/Muslim organisations, such as MUIS, Mendaki, Pergas, Perdaus, and various community leaders to the White Paper again underscore this commitment. We want to play a constructive role in this important effort of building trust and strengthening ties across all groups in Singapore.

It is also important for the House to know that the Malay/Muslim community had embarked on this process long before the appearance of the White Paper. During the past two years or so, Muslim community leaders and institutions have come together to work on measures that will strengthen Islamic religious education and development in Singapore. The Muslim Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) has initiated a variety of programmes to strengthen both the full-time and part-time madrasah systems, and to train and upgrade the skills of Islamic religious teachers in Singapore so that they understand the context in which they operate. MUIS has also sought to organise public seminars for both the public and community leaders on issues of importance, and to invite non-Muslim Singaporeans to visit our mosques. MUIS has formed a committee with other Malay/ Muslim organisations to study ways to improve the training of local religious teachers. These are but a few examples of the efforts that are already underway within the Malay/Muslim community.

What more will be done?

Other measures are also being considered. We will strengthen the safeguards against adverse influences from outside Singapore. There is already a vetting system for foreign speakers. We will also leverage on, and strengthen information sharing among Malay/Muslim organisations and mosques so that we can more easily detect activities that are out of the ordinary. The White Paper has helped in educating the public on how to recognise potentially untoward activities. MUIS will provide guidance to students in selecting the overseas institutions in which to pursue religious education. It will also undertake pre-departure programmes and keep in touch with the students while they are overseas.

However, Sir, other than adopting a defensive approach, we want to strengthen our own Muslim community's religious education system, not only as a safeguard against deviant teaching, but also to support the holistic development of the Muslim community.

Strengthening of part-time religious education for children and adults

There is a strong and vibrant part-time religious education system within the Malay/Muslim community. Almost every mosque in Singapore provides classes in religious instruction for both children and adults. There is also a thriving private sector market in this area. Given the extensive reach of this system, it is important that we pay close attention to it. MUIS will set up a Religious Education Advisory Panel. And this panel will make use of a collaborative approach that will bring together all stakeholders, and seeks out the views of parents, teachers, and students on religious education. The comprehensive review will look into the appropriate content and teaching methods relevant to different age groups, as well as training for our teachers. It will also look into enhancing the quality of the network of teachers and institutions providing religious education.

Developing asatizah and enhancing their role

The Muslim religious teacher, or asatizah, holds a respected place in the Muslim community. Many Muslims can recall fondly a teacher who has made a positive impact on his/her life and values. This respect is something the teacher earns through continuously learning and being able to address the concerns of the students of today. We want to systematically enable our asatizah to enhance their knowledge and exposure. MUIS will work closely with relevant Malay/Muslim organisations to look into their professional development and recognition. Currently, MUIS has platforms to engage religious leaders and teachers to discuss professional issues, as well as generate new ideas for programmes. MUIS also gives scholarships to assist individuals to pursue religious education at reputable institutions of learning. MUIS will build on existing initiatives and develop a structured training and development framework. This can then form the foundation for the consideration and development of other measures, such as the accreditation of our religious teachers. To help point the public to qualified teachers, MUIS will work to maintain an updated and comprehensive database for their reference.

Sir, all of the above initiatives are components of the comprehensive regulatory system that the Muslim community is putting together as proposed by the White Paper. With time and greater experience in managing the various aspects of the system, MUIS will be able to provide more precise guidance to Muslim Singaporeans on their religious education needs, either independently or in collaboration with other Malay/Muslim organisations.

The hon. Member, Mr Ravindran, noted the issue of the credibility of MUIS in the eyes of Malay/Muslim Singaporeans. I think it is important for the Malay/Muslim community to give their support and respect to MUIS. As the highest religious body in the Muslim community in Singapore, Muslims have a duty to work together with MUIS to build it into a strong and responsive organisation. I would also urge our religious leaders to work closely with MUIS in our effort to strengthen Islamic religious education in Singapore.

Building Social Cohesion

Building social cohesion is an issue for all Singaporeans, not just the Muslim community. The JI security challenge has been a test of our cohesiveness and resilience as a people. Although the issue is a difficult one, it is good that the Muslim community has not withdrawn into itself, but actively reached out to others - and built bridges across communities. At the same time, non-Muslims should understand that communal worship is an integral part of Muslims' lives, and should not view this as Muslims `retreating to the mosque' at the expense of social interaction.

I am glad that other communities have not stood and looked on as bystanders or commentators, but have made a sincere effort to better understand and reach out to the Muslim community.

We need that understanding and trust not just at the level of the community leadership but also at the grassroots level. Community leaders have a critical role in modelling the attitudes and actions that promote community bonding. As leaders, they can also help dispel misperceptions, prejudices and encourage members in their groups to interact socially with people in other ethnic communities. The IRCC is one important platform where these initiatives are taking place. But the principle applies to all social environments such as schools, workplaces, and community clubs. While the Government and community can provide platforms and facilitate social bonding, Members of this House have rightly pointed out that individual Singaporeans have to make the effort to interact and understand one another.

Sir, as pointed out by the White Paper, there is no quick solution to counter the threat of terrorism. Groups, like the JI, took a long time to form and morph and can exist in our midst without anyone knowing about it. Similarly, building cohesion and trust is a long-term process requiring every one, Muslims and non-Muslims, to stay focused on the real issues. The real challenge for us here, in Singapore, is to build a climate where extreme views will not take root. We must create an environment that is conducive to a healthy development of every one's faith and belief in the context of a multi-racial and multi-religious Singapore.

My parliamentary Malay/Muslim colleagues and I are committed to this process. We had started a process of consultation with the Malay/Muslim community and religious leaders long before the attacks on the twin towers and the JI arrests. The process will now continue with a sharper focus on what needs to be done within our community. I recently met a group of such leaders to share with them my views on the White Paper and what I intend to say today. I found the process useful and will continue to consult community and religious leaders in the future.

Sir, in my discussions with many Malays from all walks of life in the past year or so, I heard concerns about jobs and livelihood, as well as how the community was being put under the spotlight. These are concerns that the Government, community and business sectors are addressing. However, the Malays certainly did not view the Singapore system as being stacked against them. Nor did they think that the community is marginalised. Indeed, this view is borne out by objective measures of the community's progress in education, income and social and material well-being. Our own Prime Minister has given us the data of the past 10 years achievement of the Malay/Muslim community. The Malay community has seen successful individuals in diverse fields in line with the overall progress of the community. Over time, we will see more of them. With greater interaction between Muslims and non-Muslims at all levels and more visible examples of Malays in leadership, we will strengthen the mutual respect and understanding between our various communities and build on the cohesion that we have achieved in the last three decades.

Finding the Common Ground

Sir, the Malay/Muslim community has gone through an entire year of discussions, dialogues, meetings, cross-cultural sessions and many other forms of trust building efforts. The community wants to move on. While the White Paper has been well received by most Singaporeans, I understand why some in the Malay/Muslim community feel uneasy about being in the spotlight again and they want to move on.

Perhaps, it is useful for us to reflect exactly on what moving on means in the context of what is happening around us. Moving on does not mean ignoring and not dealing with the JI incident and its implications. Moving on requires understanding what the issues and challenges are all about and what needs to be done in order to avoid a similar incident in the future.

For non-Muslim Singaporeans, Sir, I hope they do not view the White Paper as proof of a fundamental flaw in the Malay/Muslim community. Muslim Singaporeans are equally shocked at the emergence of a terrorist group within our midst. We did not create this group. Most, if not all, of us are saddened that there exist within the community people who are prepared to use violence, even towards fellow Muslims, to further their own goals.

Between the need to move on and the need for concrete action to prevent the emergence of terrorist or extremist groups, lies a common ground where all Singaporeans should converge. And that is to understand this global phenomenon correctly and to see that it affects all of us, irrespective of our religious or ethnic backgrounds.

Understanding this global phenomenon

In any religious group, as pointed out by Mr Ravindran, there can emerge, and have emerged, groups that are prepared to be different and, in some cases, even pursue a path of violence to achieve their vision. Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby are editors of a five-volume work on the study of fundamentalism. These studies have noted that fundamentalists share a tendency to separate from fellow believers, and to establish strict boundaries between insiders and outsiders. Fundamentalists also define the opposition as including both non-believers and believers who do not share their views. While the term "fundamentalist" is frequently associated in the popular press with Muslim extremists, fundamentalist thinking can exist in any religious system.

There are fundamentalist groups, like the JI, who see the modern world as offering no future for them. They manifest this as a struggle between their vision of how society is to be organised against models of societies developed in the West. These groups perceive secular nationalism as a Western construct that has failed to address their concerns. This struggle, which is ideological in nature, has been termed by one author as a conflict of the "ideologies of order". One side maintains that secular nationalism is the glue that can bind groups into a coherent nation, while the other insists that it must be religion. And true to their fundamentalist traits, their vision harks back to a past which they deemed glorious and perfect.

In order to achieve their vision, these groups are prepared to use violence. In their minds, they see the world dominated by Western ideals and which holds nothing for them. Hence the need to destroy in order to build something new. People who believed that all symbols of the West should be destroyed, carried out the 9/11 attacks and the Bali bomb blasts. And that in doing so, their own death serves a perceived so-called higher purpose. This form of revolutionary violence has been noted by some writers as being similar to the way in which revolutionary socialism and violent anarchism have seduced young Westerners into terrorism in a previous generation.

The JI and Terror

If we juxtapose all of the above against what the White Paper has described to us about the JI, we will see a picture emerging reflecting the so-called fundamentalist mindset. The JI is an exclusive group that mistakenly believed that they had found the path to salvation. Those who do not share their belief are considered as "unbelievers", a demarcation that in their mind legitimises the use of violence against everyone, including Muslims. Their vision of a Daulah Islamiyah or Islamic state is anchored in the past, with no scope for change or adaptation, and no tolerance of diversity. While not all fundamentalist groups support terrorism, they indirectly provide the ideological motivation for religiously inspired terrorism. The JI showed us that it is a short step indeed from religious fundamentalism to terror.

Sir, this may all appear academic. But the point I am trying to make is that both Muslim and non-Muslim Singaporeans owe it to themselves to understand this phenomenon. This phenomenon is not about Muslims versus non-Muslims. It is about a particular orientation towards life that insists that the modern world offers no salvation; it is about returning to an idealised notion of a religious past and accepting a rigid interpretation of religion as the true path. It is about justifying the use of violence for this purpose. We must oppose this orientation towards life; we must believe there is no inconsistency in being both religious and modern at the same time. Diversity and Tolerance: Best Guard Against Extremism

The Muslim community here cannot pretend that nothing has changed in the last 20 years. The White Paper calls for a comprehensive system to regulate religious education within the Muslim community. This, as I have explained earlier, is being done by MUIS in collaboration with other Malay/Muslim organisations. But is this sufficient to safeguard against the emergence of groups like the JI?

As shown in the White Paper, Ibrahim Maidin and his JI members attended religious classes, like other Muslim Singaporeans would do. But slowly, over time, and for a select group of members, the JI ideology gets introduced. Having taken the oath of allegiance, the JI ideology of violence, hatred and extremism was never challenged by anyone in the group.

If we, as a community, allow intolerant and extremist views and ideas to go unchallenged, then we inadvertently allow such views to take root here. If in response to a question on how Muslims should deal with banking interest, a foreign Muslim religious speaker tells a crowd in Singapore that they do not need to live in Singapore, and we allow such a comment to go unchecked, then we unwittingly sow the seeds of conflict and fundamentalism. The response by a foreign religious speaker echoes that of the local JI leader, Ibrahim Maidin, who wrote to the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, on whether Muslims should all migrate to Afghanistan as he believed then that, under the Taliban, Afghanistan was a true Islamic state. Both Ibrahim Maidin and the foreign speaker reflect the same mind. And this is the nub of the problem: what we are dealing with is a peculiar orientation of the mind. If we allow myopic, extreme and radical views to go unchallenged, even if they do not advocate violence, then we inadvertently provide a conducive environment for the growth of intolerance and a rigid fundamentalist orientation to life.

Just like the fundamentalist groups who reject everything Western without a clear understanding, we find today such thinking permeating the Muslim mind in a variety of ways. Articles and journals that present the West as the great evil of modern society and present alternatives, on matters such as politics and economics, couched in religious terms as the absolute truth, reflect the fundamentalist traits. But these articles get published while those with a more rationalist interpretation are blocked.

Our challenge, as has been suggested by several Muslim and non-Muslim scholars, is for the moderates to speak up. And I know the term "moderate" is loaded with meaning. But it must be so. To those who view the world as incompatible with their version of religion, they would see people who advocate a multitude of voices and interpretations of the religion as being the enemy. Their insistence on a monolithic interpretation of Islam, with no room for disagreement, must necessarily clash with those who advocate diversity. Hence, we see groups issuing edicts of death to those who advocate a different view from them. We must collectively reject these views immediately.

The best safeguard we can put in place is to allow a diversity of views and opinions to emerge. Muslims all over the world will never have disputes on the fundamental principles of Islam, such as the oneness of God, the Prophecy of Muhammad, the five daily prayers, the payment of wealth tax, and fasting. But in the way we order our lives, cherish our women, organise our religious life, exist in a multi-religious society, educate our young, and so on, there can be differences. Of course, the diversity cannot be unlimited. Certainly, if some advocate violence as a basis of their struggle, then we must all condemn it. As rightly pointed out by several Muslim scholars, the proper interpretation of Islam is compatible with democracy and human rights. And democracy is about respect for differences of opinions and consensus building by the strength of arguments and not by the size of your arsenal. The Way Forward - Building the Good Society

Sir, Islam encourages all Muslims to build the good society. Elements of the good society include a system to protect weaker members of society, measures to insure a corruption-free environment, the establishment of a safe and secure environment, the provision of opportunities for everyone to grow and develop, a good health care system, and an economic system that promotes development for all in that society. Our contribution to Singapore must be to help build this good society. In fact, I would argue that elements of the good society exist in Singapore, and that it is our duty as good Muslims and good Singaporeans to protect this.

Hence, I am encouraged by the achievements of Ms Misnati Dollah and Mr Zainul Sarib who are among the winners of the National Productivity Award for the year 2002 in Singapore. In their own quiet ways, they are helping to promote the productivity movement, which is central to an efficient economic system. They, like many other Malay/Muslim workers in Singapore, are building the good society in Singapore. Our meritocratic system has also allowed us to identify talented Malays for key appointments on the boards of statutory bodies and Government-related agencies. And we have been doing this for a very long time, ever since your days as Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs, Sir. So, today, we find Malays on the boards of organisations, such as the Public Service Commission, MPA, CAAS, LTA, Science Centre, MDA, National Heritage Board and the Singapore Management University.

There are many other ways in which Muslims can contribute to the building of the good society. The BBC reported last week on the discovery by a group of US researchers in the fight against cholera. Using old sari material folded four times as a filter for river water, they found that they could cut down the incidence of cholera by half among villagers in Bangladesh. I traced the report and found that one of the researchers is a Muslim from Bangladesh who is currently working in Maryland with other non-Muslim scientists on this project. I communicated with him, and he told me that he and his colleagues have been working for 27 years in a search for a cure for cholera among poor villagers. As a Muslim, Professor Anwar Huq is contributing to the good society.

As various Members of the House have pointed out, the current challenges present a window of opportunity for Singaporeans to stand up to defend the society we want to preserve and build upon. Muslims and non-Muslims in Singapore have a role to play in ensuring that the good society prevails. Apart from the need to reach out to one another and to strengthen our social cohesion and community bonding, it is also necessary for us to encourage good behaviour and contributions from each other. By expanding our common space through the encouragement of the adoption of healthy common values, such as the respect for diversity, a commitment to securing peace and harmony for Singapore, a determination to build a strong economy, a desire to provide assistance to the weaker members of society, and to provide a safe and secure environment, all Singaporeans will surely contribute to the good society. It is by ensuring that we all, Muslims and non-Muslims, work together towards the common good that we can ensure a peaceful and harmonious, cohesive and resilient Singapore.

Sir, the threat of terrorism is a complex challenge. Our efforts at strengthening our social cohesion must continue with renewed vigour and focus. Everyone must understand that he or she has a role to play, be it in schools, workplaces, recreational centres, and even in places of worship.

But I would also argue that the solution to this problem lies more in the hands of those with the power to effect meaningful change. Those in leadership positions, in whichever organisations or institutions that they belong to, play a key role in this fight against terrorism. If we fail to diagnose and understand this phenomenon correctly, then we risk the well-being of our nation. Simplistic analysis of the global terrorism threat and distorted views of history and of contemporary Muslim societies and countries serve only to confuse and detract from real understanding. Fashionable ideas of the clash of different religious communities as the outcome of modern history are no different from the views of the fundamentalists who divide the world into two opposing ethical communities. Such ideas give fodder to the fundamentalist mind. We should not give space for such ideas here in Singapore. When the Government fought the Communists and the communalists, it was the call to, and support for, of those within the Chinese community who were committed to the idea of a modern and multi-racial Singapore, to stand up against such elements, that helped win the day. Similarly, today we should give notice to those who are prepared to use religious sentiments to provoke resentment towards the State or any other group, that they will suffer the wrath of the people and the State. Such elements are destructive to our nation-building effort and should never be allowed to grow. Space and support should be given to the progressive elements in the Malay/Muslim community.

This is a struggle for the hearts and minds of our people. The path of moderation and tolerance is the only way for Singapore to survive as a nation. Terror of any kind, and carried out by any group, will bring great harm. We must engender in our people the spirit that is constructive towards our nation building effort. This is the spirit that was seen in Whampoa recently when a fire broke out near a lift-landing and a couple was trapped inside the lift. A Malay family living closest to the lift-landing rallied other neighbours to assist the couple. It was the same spirit that drove my late father and other villagers, both Chinese and Malays, to form watch groups to protect our kampong during the 1964 riots. It is this spirit that supports the common good that is needed now.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion. [Applause.]

Mr Zainudin Nordin (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs.

Sir, the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore has travelled a long way. We have witnessed several milestones in its development as the community becomes increasingly educated and economically stronger. Even though the JI is not representative of the Muslim community in Singapore, their arrests and the threat that was posed sets us back many years, and this saddens me tremendously. While I do not defend what took place, nevertheless, a sense of responsibility arises. Their actions have hijacked the community and at the end of the day, the Muslims cannot help but feel victimised.

[Mdm Deputy Speaker (Mrs Lim Hwee Hua) in the Chair]

4.31 pm

Mr Zainudin Nordin (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Just yesterday, over the radio on the BBC news programme World Today, there was this gentleman who was lamenting that the developing and third world countries are feeling the impact of uncertainty in security and the threat of terrorism. He claimed that the resources and attention towards voluntary service organisations that operate in these countries are dwindling significantly.

Madam, we can see that the victims also include the impoverished nations of the world. The world cannot seem to run away from the dollars and cents, and we can see the economic ramifications of the way the issue of security threat has been dealt so far. Let us honestly look at the state of the world today. Heads of states, especially America, and numerous other countries and organisations are spending huge amounts of resources in this area. Since funds are limited, then logically the equation of opportunity cost arises. The threat of terrorism is real and is being felt all over the world. The fact that we are spending time and effort to debate this issue in this Parliament also reflects the importance and urgency of the matter. Nevertheless, I cannot but ponder upon and calculate the amount of resources in terms of finance, manpower and time that the world is dispensing to tackle this issue. I am not quite sure how one can justify pouring sinful amounts of resources and funds in the area of security threat at the expense of starving children and millions who are jobless.

Resources are being rechanelled and the pinch is being felt by developing countries that require aid. Let us not forget that the world is still divided among economic lines. Though it is important that we understand how vital it is to tackle the threat of terrorism, it is similarly sad that the developed world is now pre-occupied with this threat, to a point that many other issues are put in the back-burner. Thus, to put it simply, there are many victims of the present state of affairs that was brought about after terrorism became a globalised phenomenon. Maybe we cannot blame the pre-occupation of the world leaders to minimise the threat of terrorism, but we should not expect the goal of stamping out terrorists to be a universal goal, knowing very well that other equally urgent problems lay upon us.

Some may feel somewhat unsettled with the release of the White Paper. The issues of terrorism and Islam have received extensive coverage since the September 11 attack. Many Muslims were put on the defensive. Just as the attention wanes with the coming of the new year, the White Paper surfaces and once again putting the Malays in Singapore in an uncomfortable spotlight. This may be the perception of some but, to them, I say this is certainly not the case. The White Paper did precisely what it intended to do, and that is to put the JI issue and the threat of terrorism in perspective. The JI terrorists have been singled out as a deviant group, and one that the majority of Singaporean Muslims completely reject and denounce. The White Paper contained information that needed to be shared with the nation. It was, indeed educational, to say the least. It explained the arrests and how the threat was effectively dealt with.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, history reveals to us how many have committed great crimes against humanity in the name of political ideology or belief system. The systematic campaign of extermination of people carried by Nazi Germany, the Cambodian genocide of 1975-79, Catholics' and Protestants' troubles in Northern Ireland, Israel and Arab conflicts in the Middle East and, more recently, in East Timor, Guatemala, Yugoslavia and Rwanda, having proven how one can combine extremist ideology with ethnic animosity and a diabolical disregard for human life to produce repression, misery and murder on a massive scale. It is indeed tragic when something as revered and sacred as religion is used as a scapegoat. We have just witnessed how its pure preachings can be manipulated to serve one's own hidden agenda.

JI's heinous plans and the would-be consequences are harrowing, to say the least, for all Singapore citizens, both Muslims and non-Muslims. The group, though small in number, poses a national threat. The Malay/Muslim community must take concrete steps to police itself against the spread of terrorists and extremist ideology through religious teachings. It is clear that the onus is on every one of us to convince the rest that we are not a threat. That we are part and parcel of the same community. We do not feel that we are exclusive. But how do we give off the right signal? Given the fact that public opinion is shaped more by television, radio and film, than anything else, and sad to say, generally the media shows negative images of Islam, the challenge becomes more daunting. We must all become active participants and not mere observers and hoping that someone else will do all the work for us. If this is about defining and projecting a positive identity of the community, then the responsibility rests on all in the community.

The White Paper also highlighted the importance of preserving harmony with the vast majority of Singapore Muslims who practise their religion peacefully and are generally law-abiding. This category must not be made to feel awkward or apologetic for being Muslims, nor made to sacrifice the principles for the sake of acceptance. They have harmed no one and must be given the basic respect any fellow human being deserves.

Despite all that has taken place, let us not lose sight of the grander scheme of things, and that is to continue building and developing the skills of the community to face the many challenges ahead of us. The need to improve knowledge-based skills and other competencies all require serious attention. We must remain committed and focused on the bigger picture. During an economic downturn, such as the one that we had recently, the lower skilled and lower income groups are badly hit. Statistics have shown that the impact on the Malay/Muslim community is quite significant.

While not marginalising the importance of other issues pertaining to the community, an urgent challenge that has far-reaching consequences is the academic achievement and the economic standing of the Malay community. The means of a livelihood is critical. While we acknowledge that a growing number has done well for themselves, the community must realise that it cannot afford to sit on its laurels.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Malay/Muslim community has made lots of progress over the past 30 years. This was clearly shown in the recent release of study conducted on the progress of the community. But we still have a long way to go. We should put our efforts together to further improve the academic achievements of our students. We must imbibe in our young the value and the concept of excellence in their daily life.

The community has benefitted from the system of meritocracy and it has made us stronger and more resilient. I believe that we would not have arrived at what we are today, that is being proud Singaporeans, standing tall as equal among the other races, if we had accepted tokenism and charity. Yes, there are more things to achieve. Yes, we are still lagging behind in some areas, but we should not despair. We should, and will continue, to work and develop the community and improve the community for the good of not only the Malays but for all Singaporeans.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, there is still a long way to go in terms of creating awareness among the people. They must be made to see that social mobility is a way out. They must be flexible and adapt to changing circumstances. They must be willing to pick up new skills, explore new industries and areas. The jobs that are typically held by Malays in the production line, for example, are vulnerable to down-sizing when the going gets tough. The changing paradigm takes time and efforts must begin now.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would sincerely like to thank the community leaders and religious leaders of the Muslim community, among others, from MUIS and Pergas, who have come forward and clearly registered their stand on the issue of terrorism. They have unanimously spoken against the use of violence in the name of Islam. They have denounced this unacceptable tenet. This will certainly allay any fear or anxieties that may still linger.

I have often asked myself this question: where is the kampong spirit of the 60s and 70s that was earlier mentioned by Dr Yaacob? Do people smile easily in Singapore? No, I do not think so. Do we often hear the "thank you" and the "please"? Just the other day a foreigner who has been working here for two years related to me how many times he bent to pick up a dropped ticket or handphone, but never received a thank you, and how he often witnessed an elderly or an expectant lady being made to stand in the MRT train, because no seat was offered to that individual. Does this sound very familiar?

As the nation progresses, how did something as fundamental as being a compassionate and kind human being erode? Often, being rude and cold is mistaken to being efficient, sophisticated and successful. This is a grotesque equation.

What is success? Bill Clinton profoundly explained that "Getting what you want is not really success. Doing the right thing with what you have is. True success is about relating to other people until your time runs out on earth. The most important thing in life is just being a human being."

I am sure we know of Singaporeans who would never greet their neighbours, even as they share the same lift, feeling of suspicion lurks beneath. Why should wearing the sarong mean asserting one's ethnic roots? For fear of our own safety, we so quickly group people according to visible references, eg, a bearded man or a man wearing a turban. What happens if the next terrorist attack is carried out by a group of people wearing casual shirts and pants? Do we then have to go around without anything at all?

This brings us back to the question: do we all need to dress alike to forge mutual respect? We recognise that each Singaporean has the right and the privilege to be different. This is the basis of our humanity. Let us not judge and jump to conclusions from one's look but rather by his or her actions. I believe the key word here is "respect". Respect for others does not mean having to conform to their belief systems or practices, but a greater sensitivity and an acceptance of these differences. In fact, in the past, we have celebrated our differences and remain one united Singapore. We can learn from our past forefathers.

Finally, I would like to emphasise the recommendations put forth in the White Paper, and that is with psychological strength and mutual respect terrorism can never take root here.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Mr Hawazi Daipi): (In Malay): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I stand to support the motion by the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the threat of terrorism. I support the statement that it is important for us to accept that the terrorist threat at present, especially from the Jemaah Islamiyah group, is real and we support the actions that have been taken by the Government against the group and any other groups in this region that can pose a threat to the security of Singapore.

If there are any doubts on the action taken by the Government to detain the members of the JI under the Internal Security Act, the Bali bomb incident has opened the eyes of the people of Singapore that terrorism can happen anywhere, including our country. I believe the Malay/Muslim community also feels likewise. If there are still those from any group in Singapore, especially from the Malay/Muslim community on the JI threat towards national security and with that the safety of themselves and their own family, I hope they will read the White Paper which we are discussing now. Read the actions taken by Malaysia and Indonesia to counter terrorism. In short, the action taken by the Government is not directed towards the Malay/Muslim community, and it does not intend to put the Malay/Muslim community in the spotlight. The reactions of the Malay/Muslim community and religious leaders who are against terrorism and JI have shown that the Malay/Muslim community too desires peace in the pursuit of progress together. However, we need to discuss this issue because of the significant threat posed by this group against the welfare of our community and the survival of Singapore, and this includes the Malay/Muslim community as well.

Other than the extensive and tight security measures taken by the Government, the community in general has an important role to play to ensure that these terrorist elements do not take root and expand in Singapore. This has been suggested by many Members of Parliament since yesterday and should be undertaken by the Malay/Muslim community and the non-Muslim community.

As stated by Mr Shanmugam, all parties should self-examine the inter-racial and inter-religious ties. Likewise, the Malay/Muslim community should reassess its internal relationships, realign their priorities and enhance their religious practices in ways that could improve their well-being in this plural society. To me, the proposal for getting Malay/Muslim bodies in Singapore such as MUIS, MENDAKI and PERGAS to be an important machinery to reinforce the community's defences against deviant practices and teachings is an important initiative to avoid potential disaster in the future.

The challenge for the leaders of the community is to reach a consensus on matters which can improve the well-being of the Malay/Muslim community and, at the same time, to ensure that Singapore has continued peace and progress. But there are groups who have doubts on the legitimacy of the detention of the JI. Luckily, they are small in number. Community leaders should identify these groups that could bring confusion to the community and to correct such views.

Deep introspection should be done by the community leaders themselves with respect to its religious practices and views. I am attracted by the exchange of views between PERGAS and the Institute of South East Asian Studies (ISEAS), in what PERGAS feels as "views that will bring about confusion, and could be questioned, that could harm the faith and practices of the Muslim community". This is in respect of a forum organised by ISEAS recently. I am not sure what these specific views raised by PERGAS that could harm the faith of the Muslim community are. If it is true and proven, I think it is important for ISEAS not to repeat it again in the future. But if it is on differences of opinion, I believe that the leaders of the Malay/Muslim community should allow and discuss it in the spirit of introspection I have talked about. This discussion should be done among the leaders of the Malay/Muslim community themselves.

In Indonesia, in which 90% of its people are Muslims, the tradition of debating religious matters has existed within acceptable norms. I suggest we read the article written by our former Singapore's Ambassador to Indonesia, Mr Barry Desker, entitled "Islam and Society in South-East Asia after 11th September", which was published in the Australian Journal of International Affairs to have some idea about the tradition of debate on religious matters.

How this discussion could ensure that the Muslims do not see Islamic practices from a narrow perspective was discussed in the article. It reflects tolerance towards different views in Indonesia.

I appreciate the views of the Members of Parliament and non-Muslim leaders who give their support to the Muslim community here after the September 11 incident and the detention of the JI members. But I would like to remind them to be concerned about the feelings of the Malay/Muslim community. This is not the time for us to point fingers or apportion the blame on the lack of participation from the Malay community on grassroots activities. On the other hand, we should find ways to increase the involvement and participation of all races, including the Malay/Muslim community, in our activities.

We should also avoid saying that the increased religiosity among the Malay/Muslim community had made them become more fundamental. In this respect, I agree with Mr Sin Boon Ann on the need to practise moderation among the Muslim community. In fact, I would like to add that moderation should be the practice of all religions. But it is not right to say that social cohesion cannot be achieved within the moderate Islamic context if only the mosques here become the focal point of the Muslim community.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, a conservative practice of religion only cannot lead to an isolationist attitude, it has also not led to the formation of transnational terrorist networks. What is important for us to do is to attract more Muslim followers who frequent the mosque to come together to participate in social activities that could promote understanding and solidarity. In this aspect, we should continue to attract all communities to interact with one another at the grassroots level. I am addressing this to all groups because, generally, those who participate in social activities or grassroots activities are from the same group of people who have taken part in grassroots activities.

In short, I agree with Mr Tan Tarn How, the writer of the column "From the Gallery", published in the Straits Times today, that finger-pointing is not the best thing to do at this moment. However, I disagree with Mr Tan with respect to self-examination, which he had written.

Mr Tan concluded from the speeches of Mr Shanmugam and Mr Low Thia Khiang that the JI members who have been detained are from those who felt they have been discriminated, that their religion has been suppressed and they have been marginalised. Mr Tan raised more questions than answers. But to me, the answer is clear. The members of JI who have been detained are from those who have a total and unquestioned obedience to their teachers, which include the foreign teachers who taught them to achieve their goal of setting up an Islamic State even if it has to be done through violent means which they thought are the teachings of Islam. This is proven by the findings of psychologists who interviewed the JI members, who said that they will be treated as infidels if they go against their oath of allegiance to their religious leaders.

If their educational level is the cause of their dissatisfaction, then we could conclude that more than half of the Singapore population from all communities who do not have the level of education up to the GCE `O' levels would be seen as potential terrorists. This is because they have the same level of education as half of the members of JI who are detained. Likewise, if religious education is said to be the cause of the evolvement of the JI members, then it could be concluded that most Muslim Singaporeans, who form 15% of the Singapore population, are also potential terrorists.

This is not a right analysis. In fact, it is not the reality here. Most Malays and Muslim families are moderate. This is evident from the joint statements expressed by the Malay/Muslim community and religious leaders in Singapore which oppose JI or terrorism. These community and religious leaders want to ensure that this spirit of moderation and rejection of terrorism and violence will continue to exist among the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore.

I think Mr Shanmugam's view regarding the need to give motivation to the Malay/Muslim community here, which has been described as a modified affirmative action, is interesting. I believe this is not what the Malay/Muslim community want. They want to be proud of the progress they have made on their own ability in this competitive society. I think self-confidence is hard to assess. But it is important to the pride and identity of any community, including the Malay/Muslim community. They have progressed year by year in terms of education, occupation, housing, etc. The Malay/Muslim community has been able to build modern mosques and also propagate Islam in this plural community. I am confident the Malay/Muslim community will continue to progress with pride. They want to be independent and be seen as equals without support from the Government. They will be able to achieve more if they practise tolerance and moderation in their religious and cultural practices in this plural society.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to touch on instilling tolerance, solidarity and to have confidence in one another among our students of different races in school. At least three Members - Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung, Mrs Lim Hwee Hua and Mr Steve Chia - have talked about this. I would like to give my assurances that the schools have taught them the best, be it in classrooms as well as in their extra-curricular activities or through their academic curriculum. There are a lot of opportunities for our students to interact, build friendships, learn to be tolerant and respect one another through classroom activities, ECA and project work. This year, more new initiatives will be carried out in the schools in order to bring about social cohesion. I am proud that this debate on social cohesion has given us another opportunity to strengthen the community in Singapore. But we can achieve it only if we are open, moderate and ready to tolerate without having to affect our religious practices.

In fact, the Opposition Members also give their support to this White Paper today. But I found that some of them are still trying to gain political mileage. Of the things that was brought forward by PERGAS in its press statement, Mr Steve Chia quoted one paragraph, and that is, "We are worried that side issues important to a particular group because of their religion, are not receiving due attention." Mr Chia added, "In particular, the Government should stop questioning the loyalty of Malays in Singapore." Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to question what had been said by Mr Chia. He advised all levels to concentrate on bigger issues than side issues which could affect the survival of Singapore and their own well-being.

For any minority group in any country, the practice of moderation in a secular country would guarantee that they would be able to practise their religion and culture without hindrance. The loyalty of the Malay/Muslim should not be a question and should not be an issue in our debate today.

Finally, I would like to state that we would be able to achieve more as a united country, provided all the communities together preserve what we have achieved today.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Mdm Deputy Speaker, may I have your permission to clarify because the Parliamentary Secretary has referred to my speech yesterday?

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Yes, you can seek your clarification.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: I want to clarify that I was not referring to the arrest of JI members for the reason that they might feel discontentment in the society. I was merely raising concerns or feedback that I received from the Muslim community. For instance, they feel that there is job discrimination against them and that they are not able to really practise their religion in the fullest way that they want. Listening to the Parliamentary Secretary's speech, are we going to assume that this discontentment, or feedback that I received, is not real and the Muslim community is generally happy with what we are today and within the setting here?

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Mdm Deputy Speaker, we have debated many issues in this House. There has been unhappiness among the general public about bus fare hike and increase in prices of essential commodities. We have also talked about reactions from minority communities over certain issues. It does not mean that everybody is happy all the time. But it does not mean that people are really unhappy about certain issues all the time. We have to be very clear about whether these are side issues, or whether these are integral issues, that affect the community as a whole. I think there are issues which are peripheral and we should continue to put these issues in the periphery of our attention. But if we focus our attention on the wrong matters, then we will not be able to focus on matters that could enhance cohesion, not just among races, but between the people and the leaders of different levels in our society.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Clarification, Mdm Deputy Speaker. Does he agree that in order to enhance cohesion, it does not mean that there are some issues that should not be focused on? To him, it may be a side issue. But to some members within the community, it can be a real issue. So, I was merely raising the concern which was the feedback that I received. If he thinks that it is of no concern to the community, I will be surprised.

Mdm Deputy Speaker: Before we stray from the motion and enter into another debate, I think the clarification is sufficient. Mr Seng Han Thong.

Mr Seng Han Thong (Ang Mo Kio): (In Mandarin): In moving the motion, the Minister for Home Affairs started off by saying some people had asked why we released the White Paper. In fact, many had asked why we bothered to debate it in Parliament because everyone would support the Government in its anti-terrorism and counter-terrorism efforts.

In Chinese, the word kong for kong bu zhu yi (terrorism) and the word kong for kong zi (Confucius) sound alike. It is terrorism that we are fighting, not Confucianism.

The Minister mentioned that terrorism is the most serious threat to Singapore, after Communism in the 1950s and 60s. He also referred to the predicament and inconveniences suffered by the Chinese-educated students in the 1950s, 60s and 70s when the authority was locked in a fight with the communists.

As a Chinese-educated student in the 1960s, like all the other Chinese students of that time, I can understand the feeling of the Malay community now. At that time, we were really faced with pressure from society and prejudice by the employers. The only difference between then and now is that, at that time, I cannot remember the Government coming forward to urge the public not to discriminate against the Chinese-educated. Although not every Chinese-educated student was a communist, most employers would rather err on the side of precaution and shut them out for fear of trouble.

Despite the extreme hardship we faced then, we managed to hold out and survived. I have the confidence that with the strong appeal by the Government and the concerted efforts of Singaporeans, our Malay compatriots can also overcome the present predicament.

Yesterday, when the Minister was talking about the inconveniences suffered by the Chinese-educated at that time, it stirred up my memory of all those restriction orders, banned books, banned movies, banned songs, etc. Bit by bit, the world map then was being painted red -- the Soviet Union was red, China was red, and many other countries were turning red. It was feared then that the whole world was turning red, but it turns out now that the real world is technicolour. It will not turn totally green as the terrorists would want it to be.

The present-day terrorism is global and borderless. In the past, when technology and transportation were not so advanced, the communists then and terrorists now are different. The communists at that time were localised, and not cross-bordered. That was why we had then the Malayan Communists, the Vietnamese Communists, the Indian Communists, the Burmese Communists, the Chinese Communists and so on. There were no Singapore Communists, because Singapore and Malaya were one same territory at that time.

Like the new economy, terrorism has been brought to a higher plane by the development in technology and transportation. They have become global and borderless. Otherwise, the JI members would have to take years before they could go to Afghanistan and back. In the Tang Dynasty, when the High Priest Tipitaka went from China to India to get the sutra, he met with a lot of difficulties and danger. If not for his three skilful and resourceful disciples who were armed with supernatural power, he would not have succeeded.

I support the Government's recommendations in the White Paper for a three-fold counter measures against the terrorist threat: (1) Enhancing security measures; (2) Policing the spread of terrorist and extremist ideology; and (3) Strengthening social cohesion and religious harmony.

I would like to present my view on enhancing security and strengthening unity.

In enhancing security, the problem we have is that the sense of crisis of our people is not strong enough. Let me illustrate: In order to enhance security, the Police has put up barricade at night-spots to be ready for all eventualities. But, we receive complaints from the business community that this has affected their business. Some feel that they are being inconvenienced as parking was made difficult. No doubt, we want business, but do they want their lives? We want to counter terrorism, and we need also to prevent terrorism. Only then can we be safe and sound.

Another example is the SIA's $288 package to Bali attracted more than 20,000 people during the school holiday month. SIA's Bali package was our show of support for Indonesia. It also served to boost the outside world's confidence in Indonesia. Why did so many people want to go to Bali? Some people told me that the most dangerous place was actually the safest place. However, there were only some who thought that many people went there simply because Bali was the cheapest destination. We could visit the place, but the question is with what frame of mind do we go there. In my view, we can visit Bali to support its tourism industry, and at the same time to appreciate the danger of terrorism. This is killing two birds with one stone. We should not be going there simply because it is "cheap, cheap"!

In order to enhance unity among the various ethnic groups, the IRCC and Harmony Circles should place more emphasis on dispelling the mutual suspicion among the communities. The mutual visits to the places of worship is just a warming-up exercise. What we should really do is to cultivate the spirit of comrade-in-arms to face difficulties togther, and not to suspect each other when problems arise.

There was a small debate between the Member for Hougang and Mr Hawazi. There was some complaint that some Chinese employers persisted in employing only workers who could speak Mandarin. From the dialogue sessions I conducted for the Feedback Unit, I observed that employers were more concerned with the working capability of the workers during the recruitment process than the colour of their skin. If the ability to speak Mandarin is a necessity for the job, it would naturally become a pre-requisite that the successful applicant must speak Mandarin. As such, I would urge our Malay compatriots to learn Mandarin as a kind of skill.

Let me give you another example. I know of a Malay worker in Koh Brothers Limited, whose father was also an employee there. His boss is a Chinese and they get along very well. The Chinese boss would speak Malay to the Malay employee, and the Malay employee would speak to his Chinese boss in Teochew. I asked him how he picked up Teochew and whether it was hard to learn. He replied to me in Teochew, "Tieh gu jiu wei (Listen more and you will know)!" I think we should look at this matter in this light, then there should be no problem.

Another example is my recent visit to Turkey. I was visiting the bazaar in Istanbul when a shopkeeper came up to me and spoke to me smilingly in Mandarin, "Huan ying, huan ying! Qing jin lai canguan (Welcome, welcome. Please come in and look around)! Hen pianyi, hen pianyi (Very cheap, very cheap)!" In the past, whenever I went overseas, especially in Europe and the United States, I would be taken as a Japanese, and the shopkeepers would greet me "Irashaimase (Welcome)" in Japanese. Nowadays, there are lots of Mainland Chinese tourists visiting Hong Kong, European and Asian countries, including Singapore, and they are big spenders. So now, I am being looked upon as a Chinese. These are market forces!

Nowadays, jobs are hard to come by, and this is due to recession, coupled with the fact that many companies are relocating and many jobs were lost. Our Malay compatriots have problem finding jobs, so have the Mandarin-speaking Chinese compatriots! This is the problem. We should look at the problem in the proper prospective.

As such, I suggest we enhance the unity among our various ethnic groups by clarifying all these misconceptions to avoid mutual suspicion and mistrust. That is the important thing to do.

I support the motion.

Dr Wang Kai Yuen (Bukit Timah): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak in support of the motion from three aspects, namely, why the need for a White Paper on the JI threat, the White Paper itself and what are the desired responses to the Singapore society to the White Paper.

Despite having to put the spotlight once again on the Muslim community, I believe it is timely that the White Paper was released. I say so because the various communities in Singapore have quite different perceptions regarding the JI threat. This has become quite clear from the feedback received by the Feedback Unit. In particular, over the past week, the Feedback Unit conducted three dialogue sessions with the various communities, specifically on this White Paper.

Let me share some of the findings with the House which, I believe, are quite representative. Some people perceived that the terrorist threat to Singapore at this point in time to be quite minimal as the Government has broken the back of the JI organisation and has taken all the necessary precautions. As a result, they are more than happy to leave it to the Government to deal with the problem.

As regards Singapore as a target for terrorist attacks, they believe that, being a hard target, the terrorist would choose other easier ones, as demonstrated by what happened when the JI carried out the October 12 bombing in Bali. To them, as long as there are easier targets around, Singapore will be safe, and will be lower down the list.

On the other end of the scale, others think that Singapore, being an icon of modernity and being indeed a hard nut to crack, would make it all the more attractive, as the psychological impact of a successful strike would be all the more greater. After all, terrorism feeds on publicity of the greatest suffering of human beings. The more audacious the target, the higher the number of casualties, the greater is the value of the target. Most Singaporeans feel that the Government has a handle on the threat and, therefore, they do not need to be personally involved. Life goes on as per normal. If the Police and ISD do their jobs properly, then all is well. I believe the White Paper, by going into great details, will educate those who hold such views.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I believe we are not facing up to the truth if I do not point out that from the feedback received by the Feedback Unit, there are segments in the Muslim community who feel sympathy for the JI members. Some even expressed doubts about the Government's case against the JI. While all Muslims reject the violent means advocated by the JI brotherhood, many could not reconcile with themselves that the JI members are bad Muslims. Since Muslims are taught from young to defend themselves when they are oppressed, many Muslims felt that the JI members were just carrying out their Muslim duties when they joined the JI in the defence of Islam. Of course, in this case, they are not rising to the defence of Islam in Singapore but to the suffering of Muslims elsewhere at the oppression of the western world. Hopefully, the details of the White Paper would convince these Muslims that, indeed, JI members are misled Muslims and had been led astray by false religious teachings.

What I would like to point out to the House, especially to Mr K Shanmugam and Mr Low Thia Khiang, is that in all the feedback collected from the Malay community, either in open and free dialogue or anonymous surveys, no one has asserted that the social and economic conditions of the Malay community in Singapore contributed to the increasing religiosity of the community. I am, in fact, very disturbed by Mr Tan Tarn How's article in the Straits Times which questions whether the Government has swept this aspect of the issue under the carpet. Yes, there are pleas from the Muslim participants in the feedback process to accept them as they are, as just another human being. But, to the credit of the Muslim community, they do not blame the society for some of their members being misled into JI.

I understand from the exchanges between Mr Low Thia Khiang and Mr Hawazi Daipi that Mr Low is quite skilled in putting across his point. He is so skilful that he misled Mr Tan Tarn How in stating in his article that the occurrence of the JI could be attributed to the political, social and economic factors that may be making the Muslims behave as they do. I think that article is like coming out with an apology for a murderer. Instead of asking whether the upbringing of the murderer was at fault, such as whether he comes from a broken family, whether his moral education was weak, an apology is offered. The apologist looks for the presence of a defective gene in his DNA make-up, or whether the murderer was basically inclined to violence because he grew up in a poor and violent neighbourhood or he watched too much violent kungfu movies. To look for an apology for an individual might give the apologist a satisfaction in being a do-gooder. But to look for an apology for the whole community would be to lampoon the sweat and blood put in by the community and to belittle the progress made by the community - in this case, the Malay/Muslim community since Singapore's independence.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, may I suggest that we all go and read the booklet titled Progress of the Malay Community in Singapore since 1999 which carried the Prime Minister's speech at the Malay/Muslim Organisations' Tribute to the Prime Minister's 10 Years of Leadership, dated 21st January 2001. In it, the Prime Minister grabbed the bull by the horns by answering the question, "Are the Malay Singaporeans marginalised?" directly. He looked at the progress made by the Malay community in four domains: education, occupation, income and quality of life. In every domain, the Malays have made substantial and significant progress. The Prime Minister also compared the education and economic profiles of the Singapore Malays with the Malays in Malaysia. Even though it is true that there are more Malay millionaires and more Malays holding top positions in the public and private sectors in Malaysia, overall, the Singapore Malays have fared well compared to the Malaysian Malays. Since Singapore Malays have done equally well as the Malaysian Malays, the argument that the Malay community is marginalised does not hold water.

Earlier, Ms Indranee Rajah had also touched upon a comparison of then and now when relating the factors leading to the racial riots in 1964. She pointed out that there are many similarities. But she neglected to point out that between then and now, there are also many differences. Just in case hon. Members of the House may be misled to believe that history might repeat itself, perhaps we can look at the differences between then and now. Firstly, I think the difference is that we Singaporeans are in total charge of our own destiny. Now, there is the absence of racial enclaves in Singapore through the HDB's housing policy. Finally, the progress made by the Malay community, as indicated by the Prime Minister.

Thus, I would urge this House not to be swayed by the arguments of the apologists in drawing conclusions about the large number of individuals as complex as a community, but to look at the cold facts and figures - facts and figures in the booklet I mentioned, and facts and figures in the White Paper on the JI terrorists.

Given all these misconceptions and complacency and doubts, it is indeed appropriate that this White Paper is released. If we look at the profiles of the JI detainees, we will find that many of them hold good jobs with reasonable incomes and are house-owners. Those who have read the Senior Minister's memoirs would recall the episode of a bicycle owner carrying his precious possession up to his flat away from harm's way during the racial riots in 1964. This convinced Senior Minister that a stakeholder would be a better citizen, since he would prefer stability, in order to protect his stake in the nation. In this case, the JI detainees are stakeholders, yet they are prepared to give up all for a calling. Perhaps, instead of looking for reasons which moved these men into joining the JI, from the social, political and economic backgrounds of the whole community, maybe, indeed, it is a simple case of men looking for the true meaning of life. For those of us who are past 50 years of age, I would say that we are all beginning to feel the cold of the grave. We stare mortality in the eye, and have to reconcile ourselves with the fact that one of these days we will die - the strong, powerful, weak or simple persons. Some of us will have to live with it; others would seek solace in religion. I surmise that the JI detainees seek the true meaning of being human and, in so doing, were misled by the religious teachers. Those who sit down and read the White Paper with an open mind will find that this is indeed the case.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, since its release, the White Paper is of indeed great interest to Singaporeans. It seems to fulfill a need among Singaporeans to know about the threat that prompted the arrests of close to 50 individuals under the ISA. There was a rush to buy the printed copies, and the number of attempts to access the website hit an all-time high. Unfortunately, I have received feedback that the White Paper is priced at $22 a copy. This has made it unaffordable to many in the lower income bracket to get a copy. This led to some of the individuals raising questions about the motive of the Government in setting such a high price. Since the objective of the Government in releasing the White Paper must be to disseminate the information as widely as possible, it is fair to set the copy price as low as possible. Perhaps the Government could take this into consideration in pricing future White Papers. But, of course, the pricing really did not deter those who were interested to find out more about the White Paper, because the content is widely reported in the newspapers. Thus, anyone who is interested in the content will find most of the major findings reproduced in the newspapers.

May I now come to the content of the White Paper itself. Reading through the Paper, one can conclude that the knowledge and the expertise within the Ministry of Home Affairs regarding the JI have increased by leaps and bounds since December 2001, when the first batch of JI members was arrested. The White Paper paints the landscape of globalisation of Islamic fervour originating from Saudi Arabia. This fervour drives the Al-Qaeda movement to take on the strongest nation on earth, the United States. The White Paper also describes the dream of the Islamic movement to create a new pan-Southeast Asia state, Daulah Islamiyah Nusantara, based on Islamic values and how the local JI movement is linked to the global network. The analysis of the source of revolutionary fervour makes it very clear to the reader that unless the global Islamic revival subsides, the deviant ideology to pursue changes by violent means will always continue to influence Muslims world-wide. Singapore would be no exception. We cannot wish this rising tide away, and the world has to learn to live with it for a long time to come. As Encik Othman Haron Eusofe has said, there is really no quick fix. It is true that the arrests have disrupted the existing network, but the fundamental motive force driving the fervent Muslims to its cause will remain for a long time.

The White Paper details how fire-brand religious teachers, like Ibrahim Maidin, identify, cultivate, recruit and control the JI members, using techniques bordering on mind-control that are reminiscent of religious cults. The use of oath of allegiance is one such example. Once converted to the cause, the JI members will stay true to the cause for a long time. After all, they truly believe that they are serving the purpose of a higher calling. I believe that since the first batch of JI members was detained in December 2001, few, if any, of them, are repentant. It does beg the question whether the authorities have a rehabilitation programme to return these detainees ultimately to the mainstream of Singapore society, given the difficult tasks ahead.

Given the fact that the authorities have now a much more robust understanding of the motive of the JI movement and the modus operandi on how members are recruited, I would say that most Singaporeans can rest easy to know that counter-measures would be put in place to curb the spread of the deviant teachings. Confidence of the authorities in these areas has indeed increased.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, what does this House hope to achieve in debating this motion? The Minister, in moving the motion, has touched upon many aspects. My personal list of desired outcomes is as follows.

Firstly, this White Paper has attracted world-wide attention, in particular, among security agencies in the world. It demonstrates the competencies of our ISD. The report will serve to reassure the world that Singapore has a good grasp of the threat and takes this threat seriously. We have the will and the means to put in place long-term measures, such as restricting vehicular access to Jurong Island, despite increasing costs and greater inconvenience. This will increase investor confidence in Singapore despite it being in the midst of a turbulent region.

The second desired outcome is the acceptance that the JI movement is a low-level, hard-to-detect secret organisation comprising many cells. Such organisations are difficult to infiltrate and difficult to exterminate. Since the threat is a long-term one, we cannot depend entirely on the authorities to eliminate the threat. Every citizen has a role to play. Every one of us must take on the responsibility to eliminate this rogue DNA from our society to prevent the cancer from taking root and spreading beyond control.

The third desired outcome is the need of the Muslim leaders to come out loudly to reassure the rest of the community that the majority of Muslims in Singapore do not subscribe to the ideology of the JI. That Islamic values are consistent with democracy and do not impose changes through violent means. I am glad to note that in this House, most of the Malay MPs who have spoken have indeed done so. And it is also true that the Muslim leaders have in the past repeatedly stepped forward to issue such reassurance. However, perhaps the message is worth repeating, so that it could be driven into the consciousness of the rest of the community. In one of the dialogue sessions, one Muslim participant pleaded with the group, asking what sort of reassurance do the other communities need. She was particularly disturbed that there were participants who called for the Government to legislate against deviant Islamic teachings. This motion provides yet another opportunity for Muslim leaders to state clearly the condemnation of the JI terrorists.

It is reassuring to most non-Muslim lay persons that the Muslim community has undertaken a self-regulatory role to monitor deviant teachings of religious teachers. If such teachings could be curbed, the rank of the potential recruits in the JI would be thinned.

The fourth desired outcome is the recognition that the burden of containing this threat does not rest on the Muslim community alone. As I have said earlier, every one of us has a role to play. At the moment, the increasing religiosity of the Muslim community which finds expression in more rigid adherence with respect to attire, food and conduct towards the opposite sex, such as not shaking hands, is viewed with some anxiety by the other communities. Instead of greater integration after so many years of nationhood, this development in the Muslim community seems to lead to greater segregation and less interaction. This need not be so. I think it behoves the non-Muslims to develop greater awareness and appreciation of the Islamic culture. Every one of us should extend our hands across the racial lines to gain a better understanding of each other's customs and religious practices. You yourself, Mdm Deputy Speaker, and Mr K Shanmugam, both believe that it is important that everyone, in particular, the majority, to take this step. We should banish ignorance and eliminate fear of the unknown through knowledge. As one Muslim dialogue participant pointed out, a stricter adherence is an indication of the desire to become a better Muslim. A better Muslim makes for a better member of the community, a better citizen of the nation. This cannot be but for a better Singapore.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, prior to the discovery of the JI movement, we all thought that racial harmony could be achieved through mutual respect and protection of each other's rights, as we have done so since independence. We were inclined to leave it to time for a common Singapore identity to emerge. There is this faith that we will gel as a nation, as a people, over time, as if the amalgamation process would take place naturally. It is like managing the health of our body. So long as we provide our body with food and water, the heart will pump the blood, the blood will nourish the various organs so that the whole body will function well. The discovery of the JI is akin to the discovery of cancer cells in our body. Left unchecked, the cancer will grow and spread, ultimately leading to death. Active treatment is called for, such as surgery, followed by chemotherapy and thereafter continuous life-long monitoring and treatment. Similarly, we no longer can let nature take its course in managing the racial harmony and social cohesion of our nation. The active participation of every stakeholder is needed. I agree with Mr K Shanmugam that now is the time for action so that our children will continue to live in peace and harmony in future.

This particular situation is forced upon us. We Singaporeans must rise to the occasion. I am confident that together we will overcome.