Just like his party leader though, he's remarkably short of detail on exactly what it is he wants done:
My worry now concerns those Muslim leaders, many of whom, I am sorry to say, have lost the stomach for the fight. I am fed up with their constant sniping about the Government's failure to follow up on all the recommendations of the Task Force, set up in the aftermath of the bombing.
But the truth is the Government alone cannot defeat the evils of terrorism. Muslim communities must take the leadership role in overcoming the extremists who have insinuated themselves into our midst. Just as it is for white Britain to defeat and disown the British National Party, so it is down to us, Britain's Muslims, to defeat and disown the terrorist jihadists who claim so wrongly to be acting in our name.
Yet it is easier for organisations such as the Muslim Council of Britain to criticise the Government, the police or the media, rather than take a long, hard look at our own communities. It is easier for them to encourage a victim culture that sees Islamophobia around every corner, rather than to challenge within. But that is not leadership. It is abdication.
As Diane Abbot pointed out on this week's This Week, it is the state's responsibility to look after its citizens, and they can't abdicate that to someone else. We pay taxes for that. We also didn't ask all Catholics to deal with the IRA.
And the BNP, contrary to Malik's thinking, is not the responsibility of all whites. No one did ask the white leaders (whoever they are) what they did about the BNP after their electoral gains. In fact, Labour pander to the right where there is a threat on immigration issues, or blame is put on social issues like housing.
But how many community 'leaders' have confronted that alienated 13 per cent? How many are prepared to say - like I do - that suicide bombers are not martyrs who will go straight to Heaven? They are terrorists who, according to my religious beliefs, will go straight to hell, and rightly so.
How many will say, as directly as I do, that the jihadist version of Islam is a perverted and twisted insult to our faith? How many are prepared to institute a regime of verbal 'zero tolerance' in mosques and mosque schools, forbidding any talk about bombers being holy 'martyrs'.
Erm, all of them? I don't know any that would put up with this kind of thing. Let's bat this back to Shahid though as he's made the claim. If you want to really confront this - name names. We'll take them on.
Interestingly, Malik uses the phrase "jihadist version of Islam". It's an imbecilic phrase that very cosily posits him on the pages of the Daily Mail alongside Melanie Phillips.
The other very real problem with Malik's analysis is that it assumes the only threat we face is internal. Even if British Muslims had the omnipotence to squash any potential threat we face, what about the threat from abroad?
Malik's article sounds like the exasperated rantings of someone who has run out of ideas on how to defeat terror now that the security solutions have been exhausted. Some acknowledgement from the government of the role of foreign policy would be helpful. I can well see why the prime minister doesn't want to do that. But if, because of his costly mistakes he can't, then the only solution is that he must go. He's hindering our safety.
To use Malik's own phrase "it's easier for government to criticise Muslims, rather than take a long hard look at their own actions".