LAST Christmas, a suicide bomber blew himself and a number of Indian soldiers up in Srinagar. Since this type of attack has been unusual in the Kashmir conflict, there was some speculation about the bomber's identity.

According to a recent edition of The Asian Age, a certain Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammad, leader of the London-based Al Muhajiroon group, has claimed to have recruited Mohammad Bilal, 24, for the attack. According to him, Bilal's brother and cousins have also been trained by his group, and his parents were "proud of their son's sacrifice." Apparently, Bilal was recruited in 1994, and has spent much of his time in Pakistan since then, receiving weapons training as well as participating in several raids into Indian Kashmir.

Omar Bakri has told the press that he and his group have recruited over 600 Britons (presumably of Pakistani descent) in universities and mosques to fight in Kashmir. He also finances Al-Maddad which, with other groups, recruits around 2,000 young men from all over Britain. According to him, these volunteers are sent abroad for training to Pakistan, South Africa, Nigeria or Afghanistan where they learn of "weapons and explosives."

Such recruiting, funding and training activities are being targeted in Britain by a new anti-terrorism law that is expected to be enacted in February. Under the new law, police will have far-reaching powers to prevent groups from supporting and launching terrorist acts from British soil. This law makes no distinction between 'jihad', just freedom struggles and straightforward terrorism. Once the law is passed, people like Omar Bakri can be prosecuted and jailed.

As this law will also prohibit exiles from inciting supporters to violence in other countries, presumably Altaf Hussain and the MQM, among others, will be affected. Indeed, a number of countries - Pakistan among them - have long protested that self-styled British-based exiles have escaped justice at home, and are abusing liberal British laws to exhort their supporters to acts of terrorism. Given tough extradition requirements, politicians can (and do) sit in London and live off their ill-gotten gains issuing statements critical of their rivals. As long as they do not break British law, they can indulge in all sorts of subversive activities aimed at governments in their home countries. But the new law will at least discourage residents from using British soil to recruit and train terrorists.

However, apart from the legal aspects of such activities, people like Omar Bakri and his cohorts have inflicted serious damage to race relations in Britain. To be told that not only was a suicide bomber recruited and trained in their country, but his parents are actually proud of his act, is to reinforce the worst impression the British have of Muslims generally, and of Pakistanis in particular. Suicide is considered a sin in both Islam and Christianity. It is therefore difficult for westerners to empathize with parents who profess to feel pride when their son blows himself up along with soldiers from a country generally admired in the West. Indeed, there is scarcely any other act that would cause as much revulsion as suicide bombing. It should not surprise us when Pakistan's cause in the Kashmir conflict receives little support abroad.

As it is, there is so much that divides orthodox Muslims from their white, Christian neighbours. The real and perceived injustice meted out to women in some Islamic communities is a constant source of misunderstanding and friction. When Britons read about young Muslim girls being forced to marry against their will, they have reason to be unsympathetic to a patriarchal culture where parents can decide their children's future without any semblance of free choice.

Secularism is now so deeply ingrained in the western psyche that even well-travelled, liberal people have a problem in understanding a society where every action in a believer's life is dictated by faith. When Afghan Taliban refuse to allow women access to a doctor in the name of Islam, the most tolerant westerner is revolted. So when the United Nations slap fresh sanctions on the Taliban, nobody protests. And when successive Pakistani governments persecute religious minorities, it is not difficult to see why we have such a bad image abroad.

The bottom line here is that right or wrong, good or bad, Muslim countries generally have a very bad press in the West. From oil-rich Arabs to the bigots everywhere, Muslims have acquired a very poor image. By losing the propaganda war-virtually by default - Muslim countries and causes have lost the support of powerful western nations and institutions. Apart from the grim human-rights record most Muslim countries have piled up, very few of them have democratic practices or institutions. All these factors have combined over time to ensure permanent tension between Islam and the West.

Against this backdrop, when people like Omar Bakri openly boast of recruiting thousands of young men to fight friendly countries abroad, we should be prepared for a backlash. Today it is an anti-terrorist bill; tomorrow it can be tougher sanctuary and exile laws. Or legislation can make it harder for immigrants to get citizenship in Britain. And before we talk about racism, let us remember that Saudi Arabia and the UAE hardly ever accord citizenship to foreigners, no matter how long they have been resident in these countries.

Muslims across the world are resentful - often with good reason - of the hostility they attract in the West. When a white American blew up a public building killing scores of innocent people, the first reaction was to accuse Muslim terrorists. Such racial profiling has been criticized, but given prevalent threat perceptions among western security forces, acts like the Srinagar suicide bombing will only reinforce and sharpen existing prejudices.

At least half of all freedom struggles are aimed at swinging public opinion around to the side of the oppressed. This is especially important when there is no realistic chance of military victory. However, misguided extremists attack the innocent as they are seen as soft targets, thereby losing popular support for their cause. This makes the task of security officers easier as they can use the most oppressive means and justify them as necessary to fight a cruel foe. In this mounting cycle of violence, diplomacy and public relations fall by the wayside.

Omar Bakri and his followers and supporters would do well to remember that the battle for hearts and minds is not won by suicide bombers.