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.