Global rally indicates Iraq is not a religious issue

Global rally indicates Iraq is not a religious issue

Last Saturday and Sunday millions people in several countries
from Australia to Spain, from South Africa to Pakistan joined
forces to send a message of peace to U.S. President George W.
Bush. The Jakarta Post's Soeryo Winoto interviews a Muslim
scholar, Komarudin Hidayat, about the situation.

Question: How did you view last weekend's anti-war protests in
many parts of the globe?

First, the protests obviously indicate to my mind that the
world has become fed up with any kind of war. The people have
been traumatized by wars. Second, there was global awareness of
interdependence. No country can localize a war. This means that
the wider impacts of a war will affect other countries. Third, I
think that the protests were triggered by the fact that President
George W. Bush has been too vigorous (about a possible) hit on
Iraq, while he has no strong argument to do that. Also, the Iraqi
people have been suffering for a long time without any guarantee
of a better life. The global protests are a matter of solidarity.

Surprisingly, in London at least 500,000 people took to the
streets in Saturday's protests, a large number of Australians
also held similar demonstrations on Saturday and Sunday, while
Britain and Australia are two of the key U.S. allies who support
Bush's apparent desire to attack Iraq. Your comments?

This strongly indicates that governments (the Great Britain
and Australian governments) can no longer control their own
people. The governments can no longer curb their citizens'
awareness of the danger of war. It's a question of global
humanity and economics. Unfortunately, in Indonesia people see
the Iraqi tension as just a religious-related conflict.

Indonesians should be aware that many people dislike Iraqi
President Saddam Hussein, but more people hate George W. Bush.

Do you think that the global protests will affect America's
determination -- dubbed by many as President Bush's personal
ambition -- to hit Iraq?

Absolutely. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his
Australian counterpart John Howard could become unpopular in
their own countries.

The protests could make the U.S. lose support.

By supporting Bush, Blair and Howard have their own interests
at home. Every leader has been in a dilemma; on the grassroots
level there is a strong demand from their citizens that war is
not the answer for the Iraqi crisis, while at the upper level,
the state leaders, including Indonesian President Megawati
Soekarnoputri, there is a diplomatic demand called solidarity.

The citizens do not want war, but on the other hand the
governments are dependent on the U.S. Let's take Indonesia's
position in this U.S.-Iraq crisis; Washington is a friend of
Jakarta and Baghdad is also our friend. What would you do if two
of your friends started to fight each other?

Now the world has been trapped by discourse on the political
adventures of Bush and Saddam.

President Bush looks very determined to crush Iraq despite the
fact that the UN investigation team has not found Baghdad's
alleged weapons of mass destruction. What is your take on this?

There are political, economic, military and religious aspects
in the U.S.-Iraq tension. The aspects are linked to one another.
The U.S. is favored in terms of its superior military and
economic might, but Saddam has support in terms of religion.
However, once again, both Bush and Saddam have their own
interests in their political adventures.

Many say that Bush's persistence just reflects America's
frustration for its failure to arrest Osama bin Laden, who is
believed to be the key perpetrator in the Sept. 11 attacks. Do
you think such an allegation is acceptable?

The American people, who have experienced the world's worst-
ever terrorist attacks, are traumatized. This is understandable.
So the (issue of) weapons of mass destruction has made them
paranoid.

Unfortunately, President Bush has been inconsistent in his
reasons for targeting Iraq. It is not clear if Saddam, Iraq or
oil is his target. His apparent willingness to attack Iraq was
once like a personal grudge he inherited from his father.

Then our question becomes: Is Iraq a real threat to the world?
We, in Indonesia, have never felt threatened by Iraq. If the U.S.
does want to tame Saddam, just tame Israel first. America has
never taken any action against Israel. In this case, America just
wants to take the simplest and most beneficial way.

Now George W. Bush is facing the opinion of his own citizens
and other citizens in the world, and Howard, who has the ambition
to become the watchman for Southeast Asia may now think twice
about his support (for military action in Iraq.)

I just want to apologize because, in Indonesia the case has
been seen as a religious crisis. Non-Muslim groups should have
been more active in making their brother Muslims in Indonesia
understand that the U.S.-Iraq crisis has nothing to do with
religion (Islam).

Do you mean that Saturday's global protests, which involved
non-Muslim countries, could help Indonesian Muslims' gain a
better understanding that religion (Islam) is not the point of
Bush's Iraqi fixation?

It's a matter of humanity, meaning that there is a problem in
our society. Both the Muslims and non-Muslims must pay better
attention to each other. Muslim communities in the country must
learn and accept the fact that it is not religion that is
responsible for the tension in Iraq.

So far, Indonesian Muslim communities have been overly
obsessed with anything that hints of disrespect of religion
(Islam), but they have been indifferent to any humanity problems
involving non-Muslim communities. The Iraqi case could make
Indonesian Muslims understand more about humanity.

Do you think the Indonesian government has done enough to
explain the real problems in Iraq to the Muslim communities?

Our government is always unsure of its direction. It is always
bewildered by problems without knowing what to do first. How
could the government explain to the citizens about the Iraqi
crisis if it has yet to deal with its own problems which need
prompt actions, like the General Election bill?

How can it comment on Iraq when it doesn't know what to do to
about all the flooding, or what to do to help the workers who
were expelled from Malaysia?

Many Muslim groups in Indonesia really just do not like
America, not only because of the Iraqi issue, but also because of
the U.S. (after Sept. 11 tragedy) arrogance toward Indonesians,
especially Muslims, living in America. Then what could be the
worst impact in Indonesia should the attack on Iraq take place?

Indonesian Muslims must know that what would happen is just
another impact of the political adventures (conducted by Bush and
Saddam).

We will defend the Iraqi people (from a U.S. attack), but we
should be critical enough to acknowledge who Saddam Hussein
really is. Saddam is not a figure without problems. Never equate
Islam with certain (political) figures. We should be more
careful.

Then we should also understand who George W. Bush Jr. is.
We must differentiate between Bush and Americans and, we should
be aware that not all Australian people love Howard. Not all
Indonesians love Megawati, do they? We need to be wise and
objective.