SHOWING resilience and refusing to be intimidated by fear is effective in sending out a message to would-be attackers that we will not be cowed by their cowardly acts.
A different solution is inevitable at some point, one that will not rely on force but rather seek to address
the underlying problems that,
unresolved, will lead to the emergence of new terrorist groups and attacks.
We need to accept and understand that terrorist attacks cannot be stopped. No matter how hard the government tries or how much money is pumped into domestic security, terror attacks will still occur.
A good example of how physical security measures have failed is through observing the Israeli approach to this.
Israel has systematically separated Palestinian and Jewish communities. It has checkpoints everywhere and employs demographic profiling. Other measures have included changes in laws, counterterrorism methods and institutional security.
Even highly controversial measures, such as the security fence around the West Bank and attempts to isolate the Gaza Strip, have been put in place. None of these has stopped terrorism. Each may have helped, but none has eliminated the threat.
This does not mean that we have to live in denial with the perception that we are in a safer world. It is simply a response to the risk and we should live our lives to the full by denying terrorists from achieving their goals of instilling panic, fear, and denial of safe space and thus giving in to their demands.
The police, or in a corporate environment the security department personnel, are not omnipresent and this requires the public to be the eyes and ears and alert to risks and threats.
With this in mind, preparatory measures to boost survivability in the event of a terrorist attack should be inculcated in people, such as crisis-handling procedures and methodologies for situations ranging from bomb attacks, active
shooters and hostage or kidnap scenarios.
All organisations wrestle with dissension and members who don’t see eye to eye with their leaders.
When it comes to terrorist organisations, these differences create exploitable security vulnerabilities.
The larger the terrorist group, the more vulnerabilities we can expect it to have.
And, while large groups may occasionally get lucky and pull off spectacular attacks, they can never pose an existential threat to a competent, well-governed state.
Keeping that in mind will help us approach this threat with the seriousness it deserves, but no more than that. The more we can see terrorist groups for what they are — ordinary organisations operating at a tremendous disadvantage — the easier it is to consign them to their proper place in the range of threats to society.
KHEN HAN MING, principal consultant, JK Associates, Selangor