Dr Mahmud Ahmad studied overseas and was a lecturer at Universiti Malaya.
Such academic credentials should have made him a man admired by many for his social status and income. He should have been a model of success.
But Mahmud Ahmad was a terrorist, and an Islamic State (IS) fighter.
He recruited large numbers of Malaysians into the IS group, sending them to Iraq or Syria for training. One of them became Malaysia’s first ever suicide bomber.
He was IS’ chief coordinator in Southeast Asia, and was prepared to cluster terror outfits in the region to form the IS’ faction in the region.
Unconfirmed reports have said that Mahmud was killed in the latest raids by the Philippine military, putting an end to his self-destructive and completely failed life.
Mahmud’s life, and possible death, brings out a very important question: Why would a seemingly successful man have opted for such a self-destructive path?
Mahmud came to know religious extremism while studying at Pakistan’s Islamabad Islamic University. He even attended training by al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
If we were to explore this particular angle, Mahmud Ahmad was brainwashed by foreign religious extremists and affected by the impact of wars. This explains why he chose to be a militant of the IS.
But, this only explains part of the question.
There are many others who have neither stepped out of the country nor experienced the destruction of wars in Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria. As Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has said, some are not even very religious or considered fanatics in any way.
Yet, why do they join terror groups like the IS and kill the innocent?
I have discovered that such situations are particularly relevant among terrorists in Europe.
Many of the terror attacks in London, Paris or Berlin were carried out by locally born young Muslims, who did not speak a word of Arabic and were not very devout Muslims either. Even if their parents were North Africans or Middle Easterners, the attackers themselves were very much British, French or German.
However, they still ended up as suicide bombers, and were willing to ram trucks into crowds of people.
Why did they choose such a destructive path having been delivered from impoverished and war-torn North Africa or the Middle East to a utopia called Europe?
Scholars studying terrorist behaviour explain that this is a social issue that transcends the question of religion.
They became terrorists not wholly because of the influence of extremist thinking but because they felt sidelined by mainstream society.
These young people were not admitted into prestigious universities and were denied decent jobs. They lived in neighbourhoods devoid of proper planning and facilities, and were invariably discriminated against and excluded by members of mainstream society they came into contact with.
Life to them was hard, their future extremely remote. All they had was depression and frustration.
That made them perfect targets for extremism, which imparted in them the belief that wars and the killing of dissidents were righteous and considered the true meaning of life.
I did attend a briefing by the Bukit Aman Special Branch Counter-Terrorism Division, and the reasons given for Malaysians joining terrorist groups were largely identical.
Many young Malaysians today lack distinct goals in life or are at a disadvantage competing against their peers. Such real life setbacks and years of built-up frustration, coupled with the existing socio-economic structure and widening wealth disparity, have robbed them of their hopes for the future.
They have joined terrorist groups in the hope of destroying the existing structure and creating their version of an ideal society. They believe they will finally obtain the approval they crave, and even experience reincarnation through acts of terror, including sacrificing their own lives.
Such misperceptions are however contrary to the laws of humanity and will eventually lead to their own annihilation.
Whatever the fate of Mahmud Ahmad, one thing we are certain of is that there are still many new Mahmuds rising from within our midst, unless we really tackle the root of the problem.
Our only answer is to offer sound religious education, create a moderate and caring social environment, help youngsters going astray, give them hope and bring them back into mainstream society.
Tay Tian Yan writes for Sin Chew Daily.
With a firm belief in freedom of expression and without prejudice, FMT tries its best to share reliable content from third parties. Such articles are strictly the writer’s (or organisation’s) personal opinion. FMT does not necessarily endorse the views or opinions given by any third party content provider.