Coping with terror, RI Muslims after Bali

Coping with terror, RI Muslims after Bali

Jusuf Wanandi, Co-founder, Member, Board of Trustees,
Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS),
Jakarta

While the terrorist bombings in Bali have created a major
problem for the Megawati administration that is ill-prepared and
ill-equipped to deal with the situation, in the long term, the
more important problem for the country is its impact on
Indonesian Muslims. Since they are the majority in Indonesia, the
world's largest Muslim country, their attitudes and actions will
be critical to Indonesia's future.

There are many "Muslims" in Indonesian politics. Most of the
190 million Muslims are considered moderates in the political
arena, because they believe that religion is a private matter.
They participate in both Islamic and non-Islamic political
parties, and they do not think that the syariah (Islamic law)
should be part of positive law.

Indonesia, however, has also had many radical Muslims since
its independence, although they are few in number. They are
proponents of instilling the syariah as the positive law of
Indonesia, if necessary through undemocratic means. The most
extreme of these radicals aimed at establishing a Muslim state
ruled by a caliphate.

The attack on Bali is not likely to change the attitude and
policies of such radical Muslim groups, as their frame of mind
and agenda are fixed. They believe, and have also fueled, the
idea that the United States is the culprit, because to them it is
only the U.S. that has the interest and the capacity to pull off
such an attack. It was unfortunate that in the first three weeks
after the blasts, the Indonesian media was also carried away by
this kind of belief.

Now that some of the suspects have been captured and
interrogated, some sense of balance has begun to emerge. The
media is having second thoughts about the incredible theories
regarding U.S. involvement as espoused by "experts", and are
correcting themselves.

The radical groups, too, have been affected by the event.
Before Bali, they could get away with almost anything, including
criminal acts such as destroying properties or fomenting regional
conflicts, without any penalty by the government or the police.
In the aftermath of the Bali bombings, this will be more
difficult. For instance, their efforts to impose the syariah
through unlawful actions or use of force will be unacceptable to
the public, as well as law enforcement agencies.

Further, although the disbanding of the two strongest radical
groups, the Laskar Jihad and the Islamic Defenders' Front (FPI),
were not directly related to the Bali bombings, public pressure
against their actions are surely part of the reason.

It should be remembered, however, that actions taken against
these radical groups by the government and the police should
always be based on the rule of law. It will be counterproductive
to use arbitrary and repressive means as was undertaken during
the Soeharto regime, which will only martyrize them and so boost
their popularity.

The moderate Muslim groups have always argued that the
government should prosecute the radicals if they trespass the
law. Yet, their voices were neither clear nor strong enough, and
anyhow, the government was too weak to act. In fact, some of the
police and army officers were themselves involved in creating and
training some of these radical groups. It must be said, however,
that the kind of anarchy and lawlessness the radicals created has
provided fertile ground for terrorists.

The moderate, mainstream Muslim groups, such as Nahdlatul
Ulama (NU) and Muhammadiyah, should debate their policies and
attitudes towards the radical and extremist Muslim groups. They
have been correct not to equate the radical or extremist groups
with terrorists.

They are also right in that such groups have arisen because of
the repression of political Islam by Soeharto, and because they
were left behind by the mainstream groups. The moderates are also
right in thinking that radical groups should not be isolated or
excluded from the mainstream. Instead, they should be persuaded
to abandon their radical ideas and rejoin the mainstream.

Unfortunately, evidence shows that some radicals are using
force, even resorting to terrorist acts, and therefore a limit
must be put upon this tolerance. The moderates have been
reluctant so far to condemn such radicals, because they have
never openly debated the issue amongst themselves, or have tried
to forge a consensus on what to do against them. This is also
partly due to a sense of solidarity towards Muslims in general.

An open and democratic debate about the issue among themselves
is a real necessity now, in order to reach a consensus and to
oppose these radicals and terrorists resolutely. Otherwise, the
moderates will endanger their own leadership over their followers
and other Indonesians, and will lose credibility with the
international community, especially with their neighbors, who
also have many Muslims among them.

Indeed, the Bali tragedy has had a real impact on Indonesia,
particularly on Indonesia's Muslims. It has limited the anarchic
and criminal activities of the radicals, and has pressured
moderates to begin a discussion among themselves to come up with
a clear stance, as well as real policies, in regards those
radicals who are also terrorists.