Fallacies of nationalism-Islamism alignment

Fallacies of nationalism-Islamism alignment

J. Soedjati Djiwandono, Jakarta

In a year-end analysis in this newspaper on Dec. 30, 2003,
entitled Ideological rivalry dogs national politics, I wrote that
"the post-2004 election ideological alignment of Indonesian
politics is likely to remain an antagonism of nationalism versus
Islam". The party coalitions forged between presidential
aspirants and their running mates for the July 5 election seem an
attempt to counter this kind of ideological antagonism -- which
they seem to recognize, at least tacitly.

Candidates, claiming to be "nationalists", have chosen
"Islamic" leaders as their running mates on a single presidential
ticket; and those candidates claiming to be Islamic --
particularly leaders of Islam-based parties -- have chosen as
their running mates political figures they regard as
nationalists, even if they are all Muslims.

Thus incumbent President Megawati Soekarnoputri, candidate of
the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) has chosen as
running mate Hasyim Muzadi, leader of the country's largest
Muslim organization Nadhlatul Ulama (NU).

Meanwhile, incumbent Vice President Hamzah Haz of the United
Development Party (PPP), an Islam-based political party, has
chosen former communications minister Gen. (ret) Agum Gumelar to
be his running mate. Not affiliated with any party nor hailing
from an Islamic organization, the retired military general seems
to be categorized as a nationalist.

Amien Rais, nominated by the Islam-based National Mandate
Party (PAN), has chosen as his running mate Siswono Yudohusodo,
chairman of the Indonesian Farmers Association (HKTI), whom Amien
regards as nationalist.

Two other retired Army generals vying for the presidency,
Wiranto of the Golkar Party and Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of the
Democratic Party, have chosen respectively Solahuddin Wahid, an
NU executive, and Jusuf Kalla, a self-proclaimed NU member from
South Sulawesi, as their running mates.

These nationalist-Islamist ideological alignments, however,
incorporate certain fallacies that may be misleading for the
electorate, most of whom are undereducated and politically
uninitiated. It seems doubtful that the candidates themselves
really comprehend the broader meaning and implications of their
alignment or the antagonism between nationalism and Islam.

Either that, or they have formed this union mainly or simply
to win votes, thereby exploiting the ignorance of the uneducated,
poorly educated and politically naive voters.

In the first place, what is generally understood as
nationalism does not seem -- at least as far as Indonesia is
concerned -- to be relevant to the modern world as it was in the
immediate post-World War II years. Nationalism had been nurtured
for hundreds of years by the Dutch colonial experience, and so
became the basis of our successful struggle for sovereignty. It
is thus understandable that today, Indonesians tend to sound
nationalistic mainly when bubbling with anger, frustration and
even hatred over their perceived "foreign (Western)
interference".

Moreover, the term nationalism is becoming increasingly vague.
Different brands are now represented by numerous political
parties claiming to be nationalist, all of which appear ill-
defined and certainly of doubtful relevance. This includes
Sukarno's nationalistic version of marhaenism -- a proletarian-
esque ideology -- that even his surviving daughters, including
Megawati, have failed to reach a consensus on its interpretation;
each claims to be the true heir of "Sukarnoism" and so legitimize
their own party ideologies.

Further, the antagonism between nationalism and Islamism also
creates the impression that a Muslim leader is not and could not
be a nationalist. And leaders of Islam-based parties seem very
concerned, not only over the possibility of not being Islamic
enough in the public eye, but also of being less or not quite
nationalist.

On the other hand, it seems to be assumed that a nationalist
leader, though a Muslim, is not and could not be Islamic. Thus
Wiranto and Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, both Muslims but considered
nationalists, have both chosen an NU figure to allay their fears
at not appearing Islamic enough.

Indeed, the growth of democracy depends very much on the level
and quality of education not only of politicians, but also of the
general public. In Indonesia, with the third largest population
in the world, it is no exaggeration to say that quality education
is a far cry, even among many of the political elite.

It is therefore understandable if many people are confused by
the ideological phenomenon. Indeed, even the politicians may be
equally confused in their thinking.

One might wonder that the essence of the nationalism-Islamism
coalition is a conscious or subconscious attempt to avoid a
secular versus nonsecular confrontation that has marked
Indonesian politics since well before its proclamation of
independence. However, it is an accepted practice here that it is
un-Indonesian to call a spade, a spade. In refraining from so
doing, we seem to be trying to avoid an open conflict.

In an interview at Gadjah Mada University, Susilo called the
ideological basis of the Democratic Party "religious
nationalism", while in the essay Bambang Yudhoyono, Sang
Demokrat, this was understood to be "not secular". If his
"nationalism" also embraces democratic principles, then his
"religious nationalism" would be a contradiction in terms. His
apparent close relationship with the Crescent Star Party (PBB),
which openly strives to uphold the Islamic sharia law "by
constitutional means" seems to corroborate this.

However, by never making an attempt to eliminate the seeds of
conflict through self-delusion -- like an ostrich burying its
head in the sand and making as though everything was in good
order -- the nation is likely to continue to be beset by
sporadic, local and horizontal conflicts: Conflicts that are
triggered by whatever reason, but which eventually become linked
to and take the form of religious conflicts -- not unlike a
cancer, corroding the life of this nation.

The writer is a political analyst.