Endy M. Bayuni

Endy M. Bayuni
Jakarta

This Christmas provided another fine display to the outside
world of the religious tolerance that has developed among peoples
of different faiths in Indonesia, the country with the world's
largest Muslim population.

As Christians observed Christmas inside churches, hotel
ballrooms and other venues, outside, young people from Muslim
organizations worked with the police to provide security.

Amid reports that radical Islamic groups were planning to
launch another massive bombing campaign targeting churches, the
security forces were out in full force to ensure the minority
Christians in this country could celebrate Christmas in peace.

Christmas Eve and Christmas Day passed without any reported
violence.

In yet another gesture of tolerance on the part of Muslims,
Muhammadiyah, one of Indonesia's largest Muslim organizations,
offered the use of its schools and other buildings for Christians
to mark Christmas. Some of the faithful reportedly took up this
offer.

Picture-perfect religious tolerance in Indonesia?

Not quite.

Underneath these displays of religious tolerance -- cynics
might describe them as PR stunts -- tension has quietly been
building up in many parts of Indonesia this past year, pitting
the majority Muslims, who make up 88 percent of the population,
against other religious minorities.

No, this is not just about Ambon in Maluku, or Poso in Central
Sulawesi, which have seen their share of bloody communal
conflicts between Christians and Muslims these past few years.

Tensions are also building up much closer to home, here in
Jakarta and in many parts of Java. In 2005, some of these
tensions erupted into violence.

The attacks and the forced closure of more than two dozen
churches in West Java as reported by the Communion of Indonesian
Churches; the lockout of believers from the Sang Timur Catholic
School by residents in Ciledug near Jakarta; the skirmishes
between Muslim residents and members of a Christian Batak Church
in nearby Bekasi; the violent attack against followers of the
Muslim Ahmadiyah sect in Parung near Bogor, all these point to
two disturbing patterns: That religious intolerance is on the
rise in this country, and that the authorities, particularly the
police, have failed to protect people's constitutional rights.
Freedom of religion and the right to practice one's faith are
guaranteed in this country -- but at times police even sided with
the lawbreakers.

These are not isolated cases as some people would have us
believe. They show an evolving pattern that could spread to other
parts of the country, unless the nation, particularly the
government, takes immediate steps to address the issue seriously.

Staying in denial mode, as people in the highest authority
prefer to do, is certainly not helping.

To the outside world, Indonesian officials and diplomats often
cite tolerance as among the chief virtues this nation possesses.

Indonesia has no other alternative. Given the diversity of
this nation in terms of race, ethnicity, culture, religion and
tradition, nurturing a sense of tolerance, including religious
tolerance, becomes imperative if we are to coexist peacefully.
The alternative is simply unthinkable. There may not be an
Indonesia left if intolerance is allowed to reign.

To some scholars here and abroad, Indonesia, like Malaysia,
has become the antithesis of Samuel Huntington's Clash of
Civilizations theorem. The brand of Islam that has developed in
this part of the world in the eight or nine centuries since the
religion hit our shores appears to be far more moderate and
tolerant than the strain found in the Middle East, so they say.
Indonesia and Malaysia could become models where Islam and
democracy are indeed compatible.

But peaceful coexistence between people with diverse races,
ethnicities, cultures, languages, religions and traditions is
something that one should never take for granted. Since 1945, the
history of post-independence Indonesia has been one of a long and
painful struggle to remain under a single republic.

If Soeharto, and to a lesser extent Sukarno, managed to impose
some semblance of unity -- largely through coercive means -- in a
democracy, the rules of the game have changed. Tolerance alone,
as the rising incidents of communal tensions and conflicts tell
us, is no longer sufficient.

If Indonesia wants to continue to remain a multiracial,
multiethnic and multireligious society, the nation has to go
beyond tolerance to the next higher step: mutual respect.

Tolerance, as useful as it has been in promoting harmonious
coexistence in Indonesia these past 60 years, does not guarantee
all will be well.

For one, there is a thin line between tolerance and
intolerance. People switch easily from one to another overnight
for the flimsiest reasons. In the case of Muslims rejecting the
presence of a church in their neighborhood, the flashpoint of
intolerance was the unsubstantiated rumor the churches were being
used for proselytizing.

Tolerance also implies passivity. Muslims may tolerate the
presence of non-Muslims, but if something were to happen to non-
Muslims, would they lend a hand? The situation is likely to be
the same if the situation were reversed, say of Christians in
predominantly Christian areas, or of Hindus in predominantly
Hindu Bali.

Underpinning this passivity are feelings of superiority. "I am
better than you, but I am tolerating you" is a common view among
people who are divided by race, ethnicity or religion but who
have to coexist nevertheless.

This may explain why few people come to the Christians' rescue
when dozens of churches in West Java were vandalized; when the
Ahmadiyah headquarters in Parung came under a massive attack;
when residents stopped children going to the Sang Timur Catholic
school in Ciledug near Jakarta; and when residents and the
Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) prevented Christians from praying
at a Batak Christian Church (HKBP) in Bekasi.

There were, however, a few exceptions to the rule.

Former president Abdurrahman Wahid, ever the true pluralist,
went to Sang Timur with the Nahdlatul Ulama youth group, Banser,
to defend the right of the children, some of whom are autistic,
to go to their school. He also deployed his young men to defend
the offices of the Liberal Islamic Network when it was being
threatened by FPI members. The FPI was acting on an Islamic Ulema
Council (MUI) fatwa that banned all teachings of liberalism,
secularism and pluralism.

But people like Gus Dur, as the former president is
affectionately called, are rare in this nation.

If only the nation, with some leadership from the government,
would move beyond tolerance to mutual respect, then Indonesia
would be well on its way to becoming a truly pluralistic nation.

Mutual respect, as Gus Dur has shown, means not only
tolerating others, but also being obliged to protect them, to
ensure their rights are upheld in the republic.

Mutual respect also means finding out more about other groups,
getting a better understanding of them, and working to prevent
rifts and mutual suspicion that are often the cause of tensions
and conflicts. Mutual respect, therefore, can only come about
through dialog and a greater interaction between people of
diverse backgrounds.

Interfaith dialog initiated by the leaders of different
religions, is but a first step to building mutual respect. Such
dialog should be encouraged and promoted at the grass roots level
-- the place where tension and conflict usually develop.

We have learned to live with our differences for the past 60
years and we have managed relatively well as a nation.

But as recent communal conflicts show, we have yet to learn to
respect the differences that exist among us.

Indonesians still have a long way to go to forge greater unity
among our people of diverse backgrounds. But we know that
tolerance -- that quality we often tout to outsiders -- is no
longer sufficient to ensure this unity. Building mutual respect,
the basis of a true pluralist society, is the way to go.

The writer is Chief Editor of The Jakarta Post.