by Ganesh Sahathevan
This comment from an article published on the RUSI website is typical of the type of analysis and commentary from British, Australian and other westerners on the matter of jihadism:
Ultimately, it is the reaction to the carnage which ‘makes’ the attack. An exaggerated response will increase the impact of the incident and give it undue importance.
The thinking here is that the primary objective of the jihadi is to create fear that will then be turned into retaliation against Muslims ,and consequently division in otherwise united multicultural societies. Apparently this is all that jihadis care about, and not their frequent and public calls for an international caliphate.
In doing so commentators from the UK and Australia in particular seem to have forgotten their history, of fighting in the Malayan Emergency of 1948, against the communist terrorist.
Then it was clearly understood that each incident had to be treated as part of an ongoing campaign to destabilize colonial rule in then Malaya,so that it might be replaced with a communist government. Central to the strategy was winning over the Chinese population to the course,and relying on their numbers for resources and an eventual popular uprising. The Briggs and Templer Plans were put in place to address these problems, and they did work well.
The Briggs and Templer Plans worked so well that the government of an independent Malaysia retained it far into the 70s to eventually wipe out the threat of communist terrorism. Singapore which later broke away from Malaysia has retained many of its features as part of its efforts to ensure that the Muslim population is discouraged and prevented from ever working with or for their worldwide Muslim brethren who are not opposed to the founding of a caliphate, even if they may not condone acts of terrorism.