Skip to main content

The New Face of Terrorism and Malaysia’s Emerging Risk

When Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim expressed his deep sorrow over the deadly blast near Delhi’s Red Fort, his words resonated beyond sympathy for the victims. His condemnation of such acts of terror was a statement of principle that violence against innocents is never justifiable, no matter its cause or context.

Yet, beneath his compassion lies an important warning: terrorism today has evolved beyond the familiar image of armed radicals or religious fanatics. It has entered a new, more insidious phase, one where professionals, educated individuals with status and legitimacy, become silent enablers of extremism.

In this modern era, terrorism no longer operates solely through the gun or the bomb. It thrives through systems of trust - financial systems, educational institutions, charities, and corporations. These are the same systems managed and occupied by professionals: doctors, accountants, engineers, lecturers, executives, and researchers.

These individuals have access to credibility, networks, and resources that extremist groups could never obtain on their own. By manipulating legitimacy, they provide the cover that allows radical operations to flourish unseen.

Malaysia, with its growing economy and global connections, faces this threat more acutely than ever. The country’s open financial system, vibrant universities, expanding philanthropic sector, and international business ties create both strength and vulnerability.

These spaces are built on trust and legitimacy, the qualities that extremists can exploit. When a professional channels funds under the guise of a research grant or humanitarian aid, traditional law enforcement may see nothing amiss.

When a university academic collaborates with an overseas institution that covertly promotes extremist ideology, oversight mechanisms may not detect the danger until it is too late.

This is the domain of white-collar extremism - the new face of terrorism that hides behind desks, laboratories, and boardroom tables. It is more complex, more sophisticated, and far harder to identify than the militant in the jungle or the preacher in the mosque.

Malaysia’s history stands as a cautionary tale, marked by figures like Dr. Azhari Hussein, an engineer and former university lecturer; Yazid Sufaat, a biochemist by training and former army captain; Noordin Mohammad Top, a teacher and one-time university student; and Mahmud bin Ahmad, a university lecturer as all exemplifying that intellect and education are no barriers to the grip of radicalisation.

Instead, these qualities can amplify the threat. Their professional expertise enabled them to build bombs, fund networks, recruit others, and conceal their operations under layers of credibility. Each used his professional background to facilitate violent agendas that brought devastation to the region.

Their actions prove that the pathway to extremism is not limited to poverty, marginalisation, or ignorance.

Sometimes, it begins with a sense of intellectual superiority or moral outrage. Professionals may be drawn into extremist ideologies not because of desperation, but because of conviction, the belief that their intelligence, status, or technical skill can “serve a higher cause.” For some, the blending of ideology and ego becomes intoxicating. For others, financial opportunity masquerades as moral duty.

Prime Minister Anwar’s response to the Delhi blast underscores his awareness of the world’s growing interconnectedness. In today’s landscape, terrorism transcends borders with alarming ease, while attacks may be carried out locally, their financing, planning, and ideological influence often originate abroad, and at times, are reinforced by local support networks.

These dynamic demands that Malaysia re-evaluate how it perceives and counters extremism. The threat is no longer defined by visible militancy, but by the invisible facilitation networks hidden within legitimate institutions.

Professionals serve as perfect conduits for such operations because they are trusted. A doctor’s clinic, an academic research project, or a charitable foundation naturally attracts less scrutiny than a shadowy organisation.

Through these respectable facades, extremists can launder funds, procure materials, or influence public opinion without raising suspicion. A manipulated insurance claim, a falsified invoice, or a research grant routed through shell entities may look harmless on paper but can in reality finance violence thousands of miles away.

Adding to this complexity is the possibility of foreign manipulation. In a world of geopolitical rivalry, terrorism has occasionally been used as a tool to weaken or destabilise nations. Foreign actors, whether state or non-state, may exploit local professional networks to sow discord or chaos.

Malaysia’s open and trusted institutions make it an attractive target for such interference. Professionals could be co-opted through academic partnerships, charitable collaborations, or foreign-funded research initiatives that subtly embed ideological or political agendas.

To address this, Malaysia must adopt a new model of vigilance, one that recognises that legitimacy itself can be weaponised. Professional associations, universities, corporations, and banks must all play active roles as guardians of integrity.

The medical council could implement training on recognising ideological manipulation; universities must scrutinise funding and research collaborations; corporate boards should monitor for suspicious financial flows or offshore partnerships; and banks must develop algorithms that detect unusual patterns linked to professional accounts and charities.

However, this approach must balance security with trust. Over-surveillance or arbitrary suspicion could erode professional confidence and stifle innovation. The key is intelligent oversight that vigilance rooted in ethics, transparency, and responsibility rather than fear. Professionals should be seen not as potential threats, but as partners in prevention. They occupy the front lines of legitimacy, and their awareness is Malaysia’s best defence.

The tragedy in Delhi serves as a painful reminder that terror can strike unexpectedly and with devastating precision. For Malaysia, the lesson is clear: the enemy may no longer wear camouflage or carry assault rifles. It may wear a suit, hold a degree, and command respect.

As Anwar Ibrahim reminded the world, terrorism must be condemned wherever it appears and in Malaysia’s case, that includes when it hides behind the polished veneer of professionalism.

11.11.2025

Kuala Lumpur.

© All rights reserved.

https://www.malaysiakini.com/columns/760587

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Smart Security, Free Society: Malaysia’s Data Dilemma

In today’s digitally driven world, national security is no longer confined to borders or traditional threats. Cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and asymmetric warfare have become the new frontiers of conflict. Malaysia, strategically located in Southeast Asia and increasingly exposed to regional tensions and internal vulnerabilities, must strengthen its security apparatus. However, doing so must not come at the cost of civil liberties. Malaysia can enhance its security strategy by leveraging insights from advanced data platforms like those pioneered by Palantir Technologies, while maintaining strong democratic oversight to safeguard the fundamental freedoms protected by the Federal Constitution. Palantir Technologies, a U.S.-based company, gained prominence in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Its core software, Gotham, was designed to integrate fragmented intelligence and provide real-time, actionable insights to military and intelligence agencies. Over the years,...

Syringe Attacks in Malaysia and France: Random Violence or Terrorism? - Part 3

The syringe attack on the 12-year-old son of Pandan MP and former Economy Minister, Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli, has shaken Malaysia. What initially appeared as a rare and bizarre incident now echoes a disturbing pattern witnessed abroad, notably in France. In June 2025, during the Fête de la Musique festival, over 145 people across France reported being pricked with syringes in crowded public areas. In both cases, the weapon of fear was not a gun or bomb but a syringe. When viewed together, the Rafizi incident and the mass needle attacks in France reveal an alarming global trend of unconventional, psychological violence that leaves behind not just physical uncertainty but emotional trauma. The question we must now ask is: are these acts simply random criminality, or should they be treated with the gravity of terrorist attacks? A Pattern Beyond Borders In France, the attacks spanned multiple cities, with 13 confirmed cases in Paris alone. Victims included women, men, and even min...

Constitution of Malaysia: An Introduction Part 5

7 (1) No person shall be punished for an act or omission which was not punishable by law when it was done or made, and no person shall suffer greater punishment for an offence than was prescribed by law at the time it was committed. (2) A person who has been acquitted or convicted of an offence shall not be tried again for the same offence except where the conviction or acquittal has been quashed and a retrial ordered by a court superior to that by which he was acquitted or convicted.