Extremists in the Public Domain – a Dilemma for Governments

The International Crisis Group (ICG) just published an interesting report about Jemaah Islamiyah’s Publishing Industry in Indonesia. The report outlines the different printing houses and products affiliated with Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), Indonesia’s most prominent Islamic extremist organization.  According to ICG Islamic publishing is a booming industry across Indonesia with a steadily growing numbers of new publishers and new books every year. The average print-run for a non-Islamic book is 2,000; an Islamic book can top 10,000.

The books range from issues covering Islamic lifestyle, “You are Lovelier in a Headscarf” to the expression of radical political ideas like ‘Waiting for the Destruction of America and Europe’; or “39 Ways to Help Mujahidin’. The books are generally printed on good quality paper with sophisticated graphics and are selling around $2 each, which makes them widely affordable. The publishers have national distribution networks and maintain websites for on-line sales and ordering. Many of the Islamic books are sold in mainstream bookstores around Indonesia. It seems they are part of IJ’s increased outreach agenda.

Many of the publications are translated works of Middle Eastern Islamic militants who are popular among buyers of Islamic books in Indonesia; the different titles actually allow tracking the internal debate within JI over the desirability of Al Queda tactics. The report points out that there are no publications written by Indonesians subscribing to the Al-Queda line justifying the 2002 Bali bombs and acts that followed. ICG explains that interesting omission as part avoidance of political pressure, and part limited public support of these views which make for bad sales.

This ICG report is an interesting exploration of the problems governments can encounter when dealing with the numerous actors in the Public Sphere. What should a government do with printing houses that publish material that might be politically de-stabilizing but answer to a growing public demand? Should it clamp down or simply look the other way? ICG argues that banning the publishers or their books would be counterproductive; it would merely push the debate underground. It also suggests that the Indonesian government ensures adequate scrutiny of the Islamic printing industry by enforcing its laws with respect to publishing, labour, corporate registration and taxation. Such enforcement would allow for closer monitoring of these enterprises and also provide more information about the size and status of JI.

I agree with ICG; it is impossible for any government to silence a debate that thousands of its citizens are engaged in; people will always find ways to continue talking and debating. Restrictions are likely to only radicalize debate, as only those moderate and less involved will be willing to opt out in response to governmental pressure; leaving those with radicalized ideas to dominate the scene. Day-to-day talk can not be controlled; the only question is how publicly or how clandestinely it will be carried out.