Don’t dismantle the shield: Malaysia must keep its counter-terrorism edge

 

THE recent incidents in Singapore and Thailand should force Malaysia to seriously reconsider any move to weaken specialised counter-terrorism capabilities within the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM).

At a time when threats are becoming more unpredictable, the question is not whether Malaysia can afford to maintain dedicated counter-terrorism expertise. The real question is whether Malaysia can afford the consequences of losing it.

National security failures are rarely caused by a complete lack of warnings. More often, they occur because warnings are missed, intelligence capabilities are weakened or institutions lack the expertise to act in time.

Counter-terrorism is not conventional policing. It requires specialised intelligence analysis, threat assessment, behavioural understanding, cyber monitoring, international cooperation and years of operational experience.

The recent case in Singapore demonstrates why prevention remains the most important element of counter-terrorism.

In July, Singapore detained three self-radicalised youths aged between 14 and 19 after authorities discovered separate plans to carry out violent attacks.

One of them, a 14-year-old student, had prepared a 21-page manifesto outlining a planned mass-casualty stabbing at his school. He was detained before the planned attack could take place.

This incident represents the changing face of terrorism. The traditional understanding often involved organised groups, trained operatives and physical networks.

However, the Singapore case demonstrates that radicalisation can now occur individually through online platforms, extremist content and digital communities.

(Image: Straits Times)

A young person without direct contact with a terrorist organisation can still develop the motivation and potentially the capability to commit mass violence.

The success of Singapore’s Internal Security Department was not measured by arrests after bloodshed occurred. It was measured by prevention. The attack never happened because intelligence, monitoring and early intervention worked.

This is the essence of modern counter-terrorism: identifying threats before they become tragedies.

Malaysia must understand this changing threat landscape. Violent extremism today does not always announce itself through organised cells, bombings or foreign terrorist fighters.

It may emerge through online radicalisation, lone actors, extremist propaganda or individuals influenced by violent ideologies.

The recent shooting at Debsirin Nonthaburi School in Thailand provides another regional warning, although it should not be characterised as terrorism.

A 14-year-old student killed his grandparents before opening fire at the school near Bangkok, killing and injuring students and staff. The death toll later rose to nine.

The Thailand incident demonstrates another dimension of modern security challenges. While not every violent act is terrorism, the ability to identify warning signs, assess threats and coordinate rapid responses remains essential to public safety.

This is precisely why Malaysia cannot afford to view counter-terrorism merely through the traditional lens of bombings, militant groups or foreign terrorist fighters.

The security environment has evolved. Threats can emerge from cyberspace, social media platforms and increasingly unpredictable individuals.

Any move to downsize or dismantle specialised counter-terrorism capabilities within PDRM must therefore be carefully questioned.

A counter-terrorism unit is not simply another administrative division that can be merged, reduced or eliminated to achieve organisational efficiency.

(Image: Bernama)

It represents accumulated institutional knowledge built through years of intelligence operations, regional cooperation and lessons learned from previous security threats.

Malaysia has already demonstrated the value of maintaining such expertise. PDRM’s Special Branch Counter Terrorism Division, known as E8, has foiled 26 attempted terrorist and militant attacks between 2012 and 2024, according to the Deputy Inspector-General of Police.

During the same period, the division detained 75 individuals linked to militant and terrorist activities who were planning attacks.

These successes are easy to overlook precisely because the attacks did not happen.

That is the paradox of preventive security. When intelligence works, there may be no explosion, no mass casualty incident and no dramatic headline. The public sees nothing.

But that does not mean nothing happened.

Once specialised expertise is lost, rebuilding it during a crisis is almost impossible. Experienced officers cannot be created instantly. Intelligence networks cannot be rebuilt overnight. Trust between agencies and international partners requires years of cooperation.

Malaysia’s geographical and strategic position makes this capability particularly important. Southeast Asia has experienced terrorist networks, extremist movements, foreign fighter flows and terrorist financing activities.

Malaysia has previously demonstrated its ability to disrupt extremist plots through intelligence and enforcement operations. Maintaining that capability is not a sign of weakness. It is a reflection of responsible governance.

The argument that resources should be redirected elsewhere must also be carefully examined. National security should not be measured only through financial expenditure.

The purpose of security institutions is to prevent disasters that may never occur. Their success is often invisible because the attacks they prevent never become headlines.

(Image: Bernama)

Governments must be cautious about applying ordinary bureaucratic logic to extraordinary security challenges.

Reducing specialised counter-terrorism capability may produce short-term administrative savings, but the potential cost of failure could involve lives, public confidence and national stability.

Malaysia’s peace has never been accidental. It has been protected through strong institutions, intelligence cooperation and effective law enforcement. The country’s security environment today demands greater vigilance, not reduced capability.

The lessons from Singapore are clear: early detection and specialised intervention can prevent young individuals from carrying out devastating attacks.

The lesson from Thailand is equally important: catastrophic violence can emerge suddenly in places considered safe, even when it is not terrorism.

Before weakening specialised counter-terrorism capabilities, policymakers must ask a fundamental question: are short-term savings more valuable than long-term national security?

The answer should be obvious.

Counter-terrorism cannot be treated as an ordinary administrative function that can simply be reduced whenever the immediate threat appears to have receded.

The specialised capabilities within PDRM must be preserved, strengthened and modernised because the foremost responsibility of any government is not merely administrative efficiency, but the protection of the lives, safety and security of its people. 

R. Paneir Selvam is Principal Consultant at Arunachala Research & Consultancy Sdn Bhd (ARRESCON), a think tank specialising in strategic and geopolitical analysis.

The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of  MMKtT.

- Focus Malaysia.

Vapes are no longer just about nicotine

 

A VAPE device tucked inside a school bag may look harmless. It may be brightly coloured, fruit-flavoured and shaped like a pen, toy or USB drive.

Yet behind that appearance can lie nicotine addiction, toxic chemicals and, increasingly, substances never intended to be inhaled through a consumer vaping device.

Malaysia is no longer confronting only a smoking problem. We are facing a fast-moving youth addiction and public-health challenge.

The National Health and Morbidity Survey 2022 showed that current e-cigarette and vape use among Malaysian adolescents aged 13 to 17 rose from 9.8% in 2017 to 14.9% in 2022.

Among boys, prevalence reached 23.3%, or almost one in four, while 6.2% of girls reported current use.

Vaping has moved from the margins into the lives of young people.

The World Health Organisation estimates that at least 15 million adolescents aged 13 to 15 worldwide use e-cigarettes. In countries with available data, adolescents are, on average, nine times more likely than adults to vape.

Sweet flavours, colourful packaging, discreet devices and social-media promotion can make nicotine appear fashionable, modern and harmless. It is neither. Nicotine is highly addictive and can harm the developing adolescent brain.

Exposure during adolescence can affect attention and learning and increase the risk of long-term dependence. What begins as curiosity during a school break can become a daily compulsion before parents or teachers notice.

When a vape is no longer just a vape

(Image: Pexels)

The concern is no longer limited to nicotine. Vaping products are increasingly being used to deliver illicit drugs and other psychoactive substances.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime has documented vaping products containing synthetic cannabinoids, ketamine, methamphetamine, etomidate and other substances.

It has also warned that such products may be mis-sold or mislabelled, contain unpredictable concentrations and, in some cases, contain multiple substances.

This creates a particularly dangerous situation for users who may not know what they are inhaling.

In Malaysia, viral “zombie vape” videos circulating in 2026 showed young people appearing dazed, disoriented or behaving erratically after allegedly using drug-containing vape liquids.

In one widely reported case, police arrested three people and seized a bottle of vape liquid believed to contain ketamine after a video showing two men in an intoxicated state circulated online.

Such incidents should not be treated as comedy or online entertainment. Behind every viral video may be a frightened family, a young person developing a substance-use problem or a medical emergency waiting to happen.

The scale of recent enforcement suggests that authorities are taking the issue seriously.

Between 2023 and June 2026, authorities seized 718.43kg of vape and e-cigarette products suspected of containing prohibited substances, involving 400 cases and 585 arrests. In the first five months of 2026 alone, 267 arrests were recorded across 168 cases.

Authorities have also warned that such products are being targeted at young people and students through social media, online platforms and courier services.

The Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 (Act 852) provides important controls, including restrictions on sales to minors, online sales, advertising and promotion. These measures are essential.

However, legislation cannot stand alone.

A law cannot automatically give a teenager the confidence to resist peer pressure, question an influencer’s claims or recognise the early signs of addiction in a friend.

Whatever the debate over vaping as a harm-reduction tool for adult smokers, there should be no debate about protecting children, non-smokers and young people from nicotine addiction and exposure to illicit substances.

Education must keep pace

(Image: CNN)

This is why community education and youth advocacy matter.

One example is the HEBAT — Henti, Elak, Basmi Asap Tembakau — Training of Trainers programme, which brings healthcare professionals, educators and students together to strengthen tobacco- and vape-prevention advocacy.

The programme goes beyond conventional lectures. Participants explore tobacco-control history and policy, the health, environmental and economic harms of tobacco and vape products, smoking-cessation support, media ethics and persuasive communication.

They also examine misleading media messages and develop social-media advocacy materials capable of competing in the same digital spaces where vaping products and harmful behaviours are promoted.

Most importantly, the Training of Trainers model transforms participants from passive listeners into multipliers of change.

Each trained advocate can reach classmates, colleagues, families and communities. The programme does not end when the workshop closes. That is where its real work begins.

The collaboration between Universiti Malaya, the Muallim District Health Office and Politeknik Sultan Azlan Shah demonstrates what meaningful public-health action can look like: academic expertise connected with frontline healthcare experience and the energy of educational institutions.

The initiative is also expected to expand through another HEBAT Training of Trainers programme at Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, extending the network of advocates committed to protecting Malaysia’s younger generation.

We must stop describing youth vaping as merely a lifestyle choice. For many young people, it can become a pathway to nicotine dependence and, increasingly, exposure to dangerous illicit substances.

A tobacco- and vape-free generation will not be created by fear alone. It will be built through truthful education, trusted relationships, responsible media, consistent enforcement and young advocates prepared to protect one another.

Every advocate trained today may prevent an addiction tomorrow.

In a crisis that can hide inside pockets, school bags and social-media feeds, empowering young people may be one of the most important investments Malaysia can make. 

The authors are medical lecturers at Universiti Malaya and fellows of the Nicotine Addiction Research and Collaborating Centre (NARCC).

The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of  MMKtT

- Focus Malaysia.

Gen Z is listening; is Malaysia listening back?

 

REVOLUTIONS don’t start with someone shouting “Revolution!” They start with something smaller, much smaller.

A job you applied for that went to someone’s relative. An exam that seemed rigged. A meal that cost more than your daily budget. A house that feels like a distant dream. A politician who clearly plays favourites.

Then something clicks. One frustration becomes the frustration, the symbol for everything that’s wrong.

Look at the youth-led unrest we’ve seen in countries such as Bangladesh, Nepal and India in recent years.

Different countries, different grievances, but a familiar pattern: a specific issue becomes the breaking point for years of accumulated anger over corruption, inequality, limited opportunities and the feeling that the system was built for someone else.

Nepal’s 2025 Gen Z protests, for example, began amid anger over corruption and a social-media ban before expanding into broader demands for  political accountability.

In India, youth-led protests in 2026 have centred on examination leaks and concerns over jobs and education opportunities.

The problem isn’t Gen Z itself. They are not the threat. The threat is something harder to see: distrust that has been piling up like unpaid bills.

Here’s what Malaysia needs to understand.

We have elections, Parliament, courts, political parties and all the official machinery of democracy. None of that matters if young people don’t believe it works for them.

Malaysia’s Gen Z grew up differently. They don’t wait for the evening  news. They don’t need a newspaper to tell them what’s happening. They see a government decision and, within minutes, they’re comparing notes with friends in London, Singapore and Jakarta.

A video of something unfair is no longer just a complaint. It can become a movement waiting to happen. By the time the government releases a statement, the story may already have been told a million times on TikTok.

What could set Malaysian youth off?

(Image: Vecteezy)

You name it:

• Degrees that don’t lead to jobs;
• Houses priced for a different generation;
• Wages that haven’t moved while everything else has;
• Corruption that appears to go unpunished if you know the right people;
• Justice that seems to bend for some;
• Exam scandals that feel personal; discrimination that cuts deep;
• Or even just being told to quiet down online.

Any one of these might not be enough. Stack them together, however, and it’s a different story. This is what governments get wrong.

They look at each problem separately: “That’s unemployment.” “That’s housing.” “That’s a corruption case.”

But young people don’t live in separate boxes.

A graduate who can’t find work doesn’t see it as an “economic indicator”. They see it connected to everything else: education, cost of living, who gets ahead and why some people seem to get a head start while others run in place.

That’s when “I’m frustrated about my job” becomes “This whole system is broken.”

When that feeling finds a hashtag, a video or a symbol, things can move very quickly.

We’ve seen protests and political upheaval before. What’s different now is that movements don’t necessarily need traditional organisations, recognised leaders or political parties. They can organise themselves online in hours.

That’s a problem for any government because you can’t simply call up the “leader” and make a deal when there isn’t one.

What shouldn’t the government do?

Arrest everyone, shut down platforms and use excessive force.

History has a way of repeating this mistake. Remember Russia in 1905? On Bloody Sunday, workers and their families marched peacefully in St Petersburg to present a petition to Tsar Nicholas II. Imperial troops opened fire on demonstrators at several points, helping fuel the wider unrest that followed.

Different country, different era, but the lesson remains: when peaceful complaints are met with violence, the response itself can become the complaint.

So what should Malaysia do?

Think scalpel, not hacksaw.

Young people protesting peacefully? Let them and facilitate them, don’t fight them.

They raise a real issue? Investigate it seriously.

The government got it wrong? Say so. It’s okay.

There is a false accusation? Show the evidence, don’t just issue a denial.

A few people turn violent? Deal with those specific people, not an entire generation. And for heaven’s sake, talk.

Silence in the age of social media isn’t strategy. It’s handing the microphone to someone else.

Stop waiting for protests to happen before you listen.

Create real ways for young voices to be heard, not just during elections and not just when things get ugly. Let them participate in discussions about education, housing, jobs, technology, climate and governance.

Let Parliament hear them before the streets do.

Listen, don’t spy

(Image: Unsplash/Melyna Valle)

There is a big difference between monitoring social media and genuinely listening to what young people are saying.

One creates fear. The other builds trust.

Right now, trust might be Malaysia’s most important asset.

The government shouldn’t be afraid of Gen Z criticising it.

It should be afraid of Gen Z deciding that criticism is pointless.

When people stop believing their voices matter, they may stop believing that words and institutions can change anything. That’s when things get dangerous.

Malaysia doesn’t need to wait for its own Bangladesh moment or its own Nepal moment.

The goal shouldn’t be to prepare for a rebellion. The goal should be to make rebellion unnecessary.

A government that listens early rarely has to shout loudly later.

So when that first spark appears, and it will, don’t reach for a hammer. Ask why the dry grass was allowed to pile up in the first place.

That’s the question that actually matters. 

KT Maran is a Focus Malaysia viewer.

The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT. 

- Focus Malaysia.