Freedom fighters? terrorists? or religious fundamentalists? the post-September 11 quandary in Southeast Asia

Abstract

The so-called global war on terrorism has changed the way we look at the structure and problems of international politics. The new warfare against terrorism is like fighting an enemy who is already dead or no longer exist. The key actor that could influence the international systems involves more than a state. Security and defense not longer can be seen as the ability of a state to protect its territory and sovereignty since the enemy itself is unknown. vonalilim Terrorism has also challenged governments in Southeast Asia to redefine and re-conceptualize security. It also has challenged the way states perceived and looks at their potential adversary or enemy. The Sipadan-Pandanan kidnapping case did not only raise questions regarding the territorial integrity in terms of protecting Malaysia's sovereignty, but also challenge the way the state look at security. Traditionally, the source of threat were clearly identified and defined and, the actors were the state itself. The questions then were raised: Who are the target enemy since the enemy itself is unknown. How states prepare its military capabilities when they do not know whom their enemy is. Our national security capabilities are designed to operate within a nation-state framework. Terrorism, which has transnational nature, puts nation-state in a new security dilemma. Terrorism, like fighting a war on drug is an open-ended war. It has no start point neither end point since terrorism has no nation-state base and therefore is difficult to attack.