Speech to the International Institute of Strategic Studies
Ideas as Weapons: Meeting the Ideological Challenge of Extremism
15 December 2006, London
Introduction
I'm very pleased to be back here at the International Institute of Strategic Studies.
Ladies and Gentlemen, this afternoon I wish to talk about the struggle against terrorism and the extremist ideology which the terrorists follow.
I believe that this struggle is now one of the greatest political challenges of our generation.
And I believe our most potent weapons in this struggle are our ideas.
Let me start with an example of what happens when ideas are twisted.
Four years ago, late at night on the 12th of October, three bombs exploded in Bali.
202 people were killed.
88 of my fellow Australians lost their lives. More than 30 Britons were killed.
Indonesian Courts convicted and sentenced to death the three masterminds behind the bombings.
One of these men was Abdul Aziz, also known as Imam Samudra.
Yet, in a grim message for the victim's families, Samudra said about his sentence: "I win".
You see, Samudra believes the actions leading to his death sentence will hasten his entry to Paradise.
And he boasts that others like him are - and I quote - "ready with their souls, their bombs, their guns" to kill more Australians, Americans and Britons.
Samudra is a member of the terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah or JI.
JI attacked Australia's embassy in Jakarta with a suicide car bomb in 2004.
Last year they bombed three Bali restaurants, killing 20 people and injuring 200.
The same group plotted to attack the Australian High Commission in Singapore.
Ordinary Australians, like many people here in Britain, want to know what is fanning this violent extremism.
The answer is: ideas.
Even though they are couched in religious terms, the ideas that drive terrorist groups like JI and al Qaeda are political in nature.
The ideas are based on a distorted and selective interpretation of Islam.
Sheik Ali Gomaa, the Grand Mufti of Egypt, said recently - and I quote -
"the extremists' view of Islam as a religion of violence, retribution and war is in complete opposition to the truth of Islam".
But despite being discredited by mainstream Muslim scholars, the terrorist ideology has attracted a significant following.
So the challenge we face is to confront the ideas that lead otherwise rational people into the arms of extremists.
Because, as Voltaire said, "anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices".
Fighting terrorism in our region
Confronting extremist ideas starts with practical efforts.
Australia has committed over $8 billion to counter-terrorism activities since September 11, 2001.
We have built a global network of relationships to fight terrorism -including with Britain and the United States and with our South East Asian neighbours.
We are working closely with Indonesia and other countries in South East Asia to build links between intelligence agencies.
And we are assisting regional police forces to track terrorists and bring them to justice.
For example, with Indonesia, we jointly manage the Jakarta Centre for Law Enforcement Cooperation, which is a significant resource to combat crime and terrorism in the region.
We are taking specific measures to steer vulnerable people away from extremism.
One of the things we're doing is trying to understand what turns ordinary, earnest men and women into political radicals prepared to commit murder.
We need to know what is motivating them.
We need to understand the arguments that led to their radicalisation.
And we need to study the extremists' ideas in order to counter them.
We do this by promoting dialogue among community groups and leaders to understand why people are drawn to extremist causes.
And there is some valuable research work being done which will inform our approaches in the future.
We are promoting regional inter-faith dialogues, through which religious leaders across our region can share their ideas on the challenges facing their communities.
They have reminded us - and their followers - that the world's great religions share certain fundamental beliefs.
So far we have held dialogues in Indonesia and the Philippines.
The next regional inter-faith dialogue will be held in New Zealand in May.
These dialogues are helping to bridge what former Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid called "a global crisis of misunderstanding" between Muslim and non-Muslim societies.
We are increasing the number of people-to-people exchanges between Muslim communities in Australia and communities in South East Asia.
Muslims visiting Australia get to see for themselves that there is absolutely no conflict between being a Muslim and being an Australian.
We are also working hard in the region on countering extremist ideology.
A first step in this process is listening to Muslim groups and encouraging people to speak out about the issues affecting their community.
Muslim communities in Australia and in our region are worried to find themselves the target of radicalisation.
They see orthodox Islamic concepts of piety and self-sacrifice being twisted so as to serve an extreme political agenda.
And they worry that simplistic, yet subversive, ideas are corrupting the world view of their young men and women.
So wherever we can, we offer to assist countries in the region to reassert traditional values over extremist imperatives.
Not surprisingly, our approach on counter radicalisation echoes similar efforts by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to reach out to the Islamic world.
These practical measures are essential in the struggle against terrorism and directly challenge the terrorist narrative.
And progress is being made.
For example, support for violent extremism is falling in Indonesia.
In 2002, a Pew Research Centre survey found 27% of Indonesians supported suicide bombing. In 2005, that number has fallen to 15%. And in June this year Pew found that support for suicide bombing fallen again to 10%.
The survey also found that the proportion of Indonesians who have some confidence in Bin Laden to do the right thing in world affairs has fallen from 58% in 2003 to 35% in 2005.
And this year's survey showed that more than 70% of Indonesians believed that violence against civilian targets in order to defend Islam can never be justified.
So the numbers are heading in the right direction, even though we still have a long way to go.
I would like to take a moment to reflect on the importance of knowing our opponents.
There should be little doubt who these people are and what they stand for.
Sometimes I think there's a notion that extremists are totally alien.
And because they reject our world view, they can't really understand the West or its political dynamics.
On the contrary, they know the West intimately.
The terrorists who preach the extremist message are politically much smarter than we give them credit for.
They watch their enemy - that's us - very closely.
A remarkable number have studied overseas and many of course live in our own communities.
They see our freedoms as a weakness to exploit.
For instance, they exploit the freedom of the internet to transmit extremist views.
Margaret Thatcher famously spoke of denying terrorists the "oxygen of publicity".
But in the internet age, terrorist propaganda is available everywhere. It cannot be blocked.
So it will take a concerted campaign from politicians and intellectual leaders from all countries to discredit extremist ideology.
At the heart of this campaign is a battle over the totalitarian ideas of extremism.
It is about how the extremists wish to organise societies and countries.
They wish them to be organised along closed and rigid lines.
We may find the ideas behind the extremist narrative misguided but they are powerful.
As the German poet Heinrich Heine warned the French, philosophical concepts nurtured in the stillness of a professor's study could destroy a civilisation.
It's worth remembering that Heine, whose books were burnt by the Nazis in 1933, is famous for writing, "where they burn books, they will in the end, burn human beings too."
Tellingly, when he wrote those lines he was referring to the burning of the Holy Qu'ran by the Spanish Inquisition.
The extremist narrative
Let me take a few minutes to outline what the extremists believe and what they want.
These are some of the things that usually form the terrorist narrative.
Islam is under attack from the West, they say.
They argue that the Islamic world is divided, and the governments of Muslim countries are under the sway of the morally corrupt West.
This is because Muslims have strayed from the so-called "correct" religious path.
They say democracy is a false religion because only God can exercise sovereignty over worldly communities.
The personal liberties and materialism that characterise the Western way of life - including the freedoms enjoyed by women - constitute a mortal threat to Islamic society.
And they argue that the West is responsible for the eviction of the Palestinians from their land and has occupied Iraq in order to enslave its people and plunder its oil wealth.
The extremists argue that the only way to unify the "Islamic nation" is by eliminating all Western influence in Muslim countries and overthrowing the current regimes.
The means to do this is violent Jihad, which they define as a religious duty.
And since the Muslim world lacks the military and technological means to win this conflict, they argue that terrorism is a legitimate tactic.
The words of Osama Bin Laden, posted on an Islamist website, speak for themselves-and I quote-"fear God, try to please him and do not consult with anyone regarding the killing of those unbelievers."
That is the plan.
And ultimately, what the terrorists want is to found a new political order: an Islamic super-state based on the most extreme interpretation of religious Sharia Law.
Some dream of recreating the Islamic society that existed in seventh century Arabia.
Even though the vast majority of Muslims reject this nihilistic ideology and its gruesome methods, the terrorist narrative does strike a chord and it does win recruits.
It speaks to the frustration of Muslims with the lack of economic and political progress in many Muslim countries, particularly in the Middle East.
And it cleverly draws strength from the natural tendency of people to turn to religion in times of change and uncertainty.
Of course, the weaving together of religion and politics today is not unique to Islam.
The increasingly diverse political versions of Islam we are seeing around the world today are part of a wider resurgence in religion and spirituality.
Some say this trend is linked to a general disquiet about modern society.
But as people search for meaning and spiritual fulfilment they can easily be misled by utopian ideas packaged as simple solutions to complex political problems.
This methodology has attracted recruits to radical causes down through the ages.
Yet history teaches us that grand social dreams can too easily become total nightmares when applied in the real world.
Western history resounds with the clash between the supporters of free thought and expression, pluralism and tolerance on one side…
… and on the other the supporters of authoritarianism, intolerance and unreasoning faith.
The philosopher Karl Popper characterised this a contest between an open society - the one in which we live - and its enemies.
Islamic history has similarly witnessed clashes between proponents of absolutist doctrines and those who held more moderate views.
Today, Islam is undergoing just such a struggle between a minority of ambitious reactionaries and the tolerant mass of believers.
Countering the terrorist narrative
This is the context of our struggle against extremism today.
To defend our open society, I believe men and women of good will must make some simple but strong points against the totalitarian ambitions of the extremists.
First, we should point out what their bleak ideology means in practice.
Because what we find is that revolutionary pamphleteers offer little practical guide to the hard daily tasks of running a society.
Afghanistan under the Taliban
As if to underline this, the extremists themselves say the closest they ever got to a model society was Afghanistan under the Taliban.
So let me briefly recall what happened after the Taliban imposed revolutionary rule.
Afghanistan was once a society where 40 per cent of doctors were women.
Kabul was regarded as one of the most liberated cities for women in all of Asia.
But when the Taliban seized power they banned all women from working…and eliminated education for girls
They had virtually no program to provide public health and education.
Almost every form of entertainment was banned, including television, videos, satellite dishes, music and all games including chess, football and kite-flying
Taliban soldiers stood on main streets arresting men without beards.
Public floggings, stonings and executions were regular events at Kabul's football stadium.
The Taliban closed down all NGO offices, in effect abandoning the more than 1.2 million people who relied on NGO assistance for basic needs.
After the Taliban were deposed-and I am proud that Australia was part of the international operation to oust them-ordinary Afghans wasted no time in demonstrating that they did not share the Taliban's revolutionary zeal.
In post-Taliban Kabul and Mazar-e-Sharif, people again watched movies, danced to music and flew kites.
Now, I know that Afghanistan has just come through a tough summer. There is enormous work ahead.
But since the Taliban, ten times as many Afghans have access to health care.
There has been a six-fold rise in the number of children going to school.
These are practical results that the revolutionaries didn't care about.
It shows why a radical approach to society is unworkable.
Life under the Taliban was a graphic demonstration to Muslims everywhere of what would happen if the extremists win control.
And the reconstruction of Afghanistan shows the goodwill of the international community to undo the harm and bring development and the rule of law to all parts of the country.
We continue to have a substantial Australian Defence presence in Afghanistan.
And I recognise particularly the sacrifice made by British, Canadian and other forces in this endeavour.
Indeed, what greater example of our support for Islamic communities could there be than our efforts to rebuild Afghanistan?
Extremists may offer a vision of a utopian society.
But how will they provide education to children, running water for households, and better roads for farmers?
On these questions, they simply have no answers, and we need to make that point clearly and often.
No conflict between the West and Islam
The second element of our counter-narrative is to explain as often as we can that there is no conflict between the West and Islam.
It is important that all people understand this.
Extremists want to strike a wedge of misunderstanding to split communities apart.
It is in the extremist's interest to exaggerate religious and cultural differences.
In reality, cultures and communities share much common ground.
To limit misunderstanding, we need politicians, community, religious and intellectual leaders, and people of goodwill everywhere to explore and develop this common ground.
The world's great civilisations share fundamental truths.
There are, for instance, common concepts of right and wrong, justice and fairness, honesty, decency and human dignity.
Scholars tell us of the historical overlaps between Western and Islamic jurisprudence.
Even in philosophically fraught areas such as warfare there are parallels between the just war tradition of Western thought and Islamic jurisprudence.
Both traditions reflect concepts that are now enshrined in international law such as the protection afforded to innocent civilians.
Scholars tell us that the Qur'an elaborates a range of rights, including: the right to life; to respect; to acquire knowledge; the right to sustenance; to work; to 'the good life'; the rights of minorities; and the right to protect holy places.
These are rights that all faiths can accept.
The recent visit by the Pope to Turkey, when he faced Mecca to meditate, was enormously important in advancing understanding between the faiths.
If the West and Islam can develop a shared understanding, we will have dealt the extremists a powerful blow.
In doing so, we must also recognise and sympathise with the distress that many Muslims currently feel as a result of the internal and external pressures that are being placed on their faith.
When a terrorist atrocity takes place it can all too easily hijack popular perceptions of Islam in the non-Muslim community.
And tragically, it is more often Muslims who are the victims of terrorism-either directly, or indirectly through the negative economic and social impacts that follow.
This reinforces my view that narrowly defining people by their faith alone is a foolish trap.
Identity is more complex than this.
For example, I am an Australian. I am a politician. I am also an Anglican. And I'm a lover of cricket. But why should I be defined as any one of these things - they are all a part of my identity, but none of them alone is my identity.
An open society gives humans the choice to express their identity in many ways.
Support Muslims speaking out against extremism
The third aspect of our counter-narrative should be to encourage Muslims to continue to speak out against extremism.
As I mentioned before, Muslims have a great interest in preserving the integrity of their community from radical intrusion.
But in encouraging this debate within the Islamic world, the West faces an emerging dilemma.
In a climate where Muslim communities are under pressure from radical groups, it is hard for what we might consider progressive Muslim voices to be persuasive.
So it may well be that the more credible voices in the debate are what we in the West would regard as very conservative Muslim groups.
These more traditional and conservative Muslim leaders have theological credibility within their communities.
These leaders may not always share the West's interests in pluralism and in the development of liberal institutions.
They won't share our views on gender equality.
Nevertheless, many of these leaders speak out against the selective and inaccurate interpretations of the Qu'ran used by extremists to justify violence.
They oppose violence, killing of innocents and branding opponents apostate.
So I think we must be willing to build on what common ground we can identify, if collectively we are to meet the challenge of terrorism.
Conclusion
Ladies and Gentlemen, the ideological struggle against extremism that I've spoken about this afternoon may well last a generation.
The lesson of the great 20th Century struggles against totalitarianism is that victory takes perseverance and belief.
Values are important to foreign policy.
Indeed, I believe they are inseparable from foreign policy.
Australian foreign policy reflects our liberal democracy and our belief in the inherent value of freedom in all its forms-political, economic, social and intellectual.
Australia has shown a tradition of loyalty to causes and principles that have involved us in events well beyond our shores.
We played our part in the great struggles of the 20th century.
We fought against German militarism, European fascism, Japanese imperialism, and communist aggression and expansion in Asia.
We continue to contribute to the development of free societies in our region.
Our foreign policy is based on our values and our national interest.
As a secular society, organised religion has no part in our foreign policy.
So for some to claim that Australia is part of some Western anti-Islamic agenda is simply absurd.
All people have legitimate concerns about the violence and the unjust casualties of war.
But in many countries, particularly in the Middle East, extremists exploit the conflicts between Israel and the Palestinians and, more recently, the war in Iraq, to foster anti-Western sentiment.
I recognise that the Israel-Palestinian conflict is a highly symbolic issue for many Muslims.
Australia believes that resolving this dispute is of great importance for its own sake, quite apart from its greater significance.
We support all non-violent efforts to that end.
We support international efforts to address the issue including those of the Quartet. We hope that a return to the roadmap for peace is possible.
The violence in this conflict offends everyone's sense of justice.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I said that the struggle against terrorism and its extremist ideology is one of our generation's greatest political challenges.
We shouldn't be discouraged by the task.
Soviet Communism began in a back room in London in 1903 with Lenin, a handful of followers and a half a dozen pistols.
They took an idea and turned it into a plan for political power.
That revolutionary regime and its totalitarian ideology was an ideological storm that inflicted catastrophic results on the world.
Standing up against totalitarianism - and eventually defeating it - took resolve and the marshalling of intellectual and national resources.
At the beginning of the 21st century, terrorism and its extremist ideology is another storm bursting upon the world.
But we are ready.
Fighting for our common ideals of liberty, tolerance, democratic freedom, moderation and pluralism has won us victory before.
And I believe that, if we can rally behind these ideals again, we can defeat terrorism.
Thank you.