Can a man of religion be a democrat at the same time?

Can a man of religion be a democrat at the same time?

A divisive way of thinking as in the Muslim-non Muslim or
majority-minority dichotomy has reinvigorated the political stage
lately. Political analyst J. Soedjati Djiwandono reflects on this
issue.

JAKARTA (JP): Deputy chairman of the National Awakening Party
(PKB) Dr. Alwi Shihab stated last weekend that a possible
coalition between PKB, the National Mandate Party (PAN) and the
Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) would
not necessarily mean the new president would be Megawati
Soekarnoputri, chairwoman of PDI Perjuangan, in the event of her
party winning the largest number of votes.

He said there was an ongoing debate within his party (or
within his party's principal supporter, the Muslim organization
Nahdlatul Ulama) regarding the acceptability of a woman
president. It was a statement almost certainly emanating from an
Islamic point of view. In addition, he said that they ought to
agree on a president acceptable to the majority of the people.

I cannot possibly argue on theological grounds, let alone on
Islamic theology, either for or against the contention. However,
I cannot but take note that given the real possibility that the
present trend continues and PDI Perjuangan wins a majority of the
vote, I would bet that the majority of its electorate are
Muslims. These people have voted for the party, knowing full well
that its leader is a woman, who will then have a good chance of
being elected president. They would, in effect, accept a woman
president.

So what did the gentleman mean by his remark that the
candidate should be acceptable to a majority of the people? To be
sure, one can still argue what kind of majority: a simple or
absolute majority? But he did not elaborate on this point. Or did
he mean that a new majority is to be determined on that
particular issue, and if so, in what way? It would not seem
unthinkable to do so within PKB itself, if that should be
considered necessary prior to its decision on a coalition with
PDI Perjuangan.

Indeed, as many Muslims would certainly argue, in voting for
PDI Perjuangan, its Muslim voters, consciously or otherwise, have
ignored an Islamic tenet. It is comforting to learn, however,
that the issue is at least still an area of debate within the
party or NU. That is a process of democracy and a good sign of
the democratic spirit.

To my understanding, Dr. Alwi Shihab himself did not express
his own personal view on the issue. He merely pointed out a
reality within his party. Yet, I must admit I was a little uneasy
to hear the remark from a Muslim scholar. Although I do not know
him personally, I listened to some of his lectures on TV during
the fasting month last year and I highly respect him as a learned
scholar. He is an intelligent, sensible and honest man with moral
courage to say what he believes to be good and right, whether or
not these views are popular among his co-religionists.

It is indeed good and proper for a politician to listen to the
wishes of the people, at least the majority of the people.

In my view, however, that is not enough. I would expect more
from politicians and scholars alike, especially those of his
caliber. They should play an active part in the process of
political education for the public, especially in a country like
ours, which is still an infant, as it were, in understanding and
practicing modern democracy.

Is it, I wonder, really contradictory for one to be a good
Muslim, a Christian, or whatever religion one may profess, and a
democrat at the same time? That seems to be an essential question
for Indonesians, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, yet to be solved
once and for all in Indonesia.

If we Indonesians are really determined to continue to live as
one nation, we must do away with the habit of thinking in terms
of the majority-minority equation, particularly the Muslim-non-
Muslim dichotomy with all its implications.

We all must respect what is accepted as good and sacred in one
another's religion. But in the context of living as a nation, we
ought to be commonly bound by what are increasingly accepted
internationally as universal values epitomized in democratic
ideals which demand equality and justice for all, and respect for
human dignity and human rights. It is on the basis of these
ideals that we strive for the common good, for the general
welfare.

We all have suffered enough from religious tensions, prejudice
and misunderstandings for over half a century. In fact, to my
mind, we have been regressing in this respect. National unity is
something we must continue to work for. Unity in diversity is not
something to be taken for granted. Its maintenance would be
determined by the maintenance of justice. Who would be interested
in national unity, if within that unity one should suffer from
injustices, not only for racial, ethnic, or cultural reasons, but
also because of religious backgrounds?

I often wish that we had taken a long time ago the Indian-
Pakistani model, dividing ourselves peacefully into two separate
sovereign states, one secular, the other Islamic, but without its
perennial territorial disputes. That is a terrible dream. But the
alternative has been no better.

Let me note, finally, that Pakistan, an Islamic republic, has
had a woman prime minister. So has Bangladesh, another Islamic
state. Turkey, while a secular state is a country with a large
majority of Muslims. It also has had a woman prime minister. Do
we Indonesians, with the largest Muslim majority in the world,
want to continue to lag behind?