Gus Dur supporters won't stage violent protests: NU leader

Criticisms against President Abdurrahman Wahid have reached unreasonable levels, according to ali Maschan Moesa, chief of East Java branch of Nahdlatul Ulama, the staunchest supporter of the President. He told The Jakarta Post's contributor Sirikit Syah in Surabaya that the anti-Gus Dur campaign is adversely affecting development programs, and that members of Indonesia's 10,000 pesantren (Islamic boarding schools) should stand up and take action.

Question: How do you explain the rage of NU members when Gus Dur is harshly criticized?

Answer: We are in a dilemma here. We are really enraged. Those criticisms have gone too far, too much, and unreasonable. It is not productive for the people and the development programs.

But we do have to exercise our common sense. We can be as heated as anything (over the criticism) but we must remain cool- headed. We do not instigate NU members or people to be angry. Instead, we talk to them, listen to them, and together seek solutions. One of the plans (for the solutions) is what we are organizing now.

Q: Are you referring to a campaign to mobilize the pesantren people to Jakarta in defense of the President?

A: It is not just for defending the President. It is to let this government carry out its job in a conducive climate. And we will not launch a massive and violent demonstration. We will talk to legislators, executives, public figures, prominent leaders, NGOs, etc.

We want all elements of this nation to be together in seeking solutions in a peaceful manner.

Q: There have been other religious groups who held massive, sometimes violent, rallies in Jakarta. What is your comment?

A: I think they are just using religion as a vehicle to achieve their political ambitions. What is important is to use political means to reach religious aims, to apply religious rules and way of life. Not the other way around; otherwise, it would be dangerous and this is what is happening in Indonesia at the moment (the abuse of religion for political gains).

Q: We have seen leaders of the two largest Islamic organizations, NU and Muhammadiyah, engage in a war of words. Your comment?

A: In East Java, at the leadership level, the two organizations enjoy very good relations. We understand and respect each other, and we agree that differences between our national leaders are just a discourse that enrich people in a democratic setting. People in the lower ranks of the organizations should not interpret the squabbles as fatal disputes.

But I admit that many of the grassroots tend to be emotional, and that is because they have strong solidarity and loyalty. Debates among leaders of the two organizations transform in the lower level as friction. (This is why) we, the leaders of those organizations, work hard to avoid a major clash.

Q: What do you think is the solution for our community now being torn apart by differences?

A: This is the time for reconciliation. The plan to establish a Commission of Reconciliation must be realized now. Somebody must pursue and bring this to reality.

Unfortunately, Indonesia has lost a mediator (for conflicting parties). It used to be Gus Dur who acted as a mediator in the past. Now he is the President. So far, there is nobody trusted enough by all parties to become their mediator.

This is the weakness of the reformation era. Everybody thinks he/she is more important than the other. The elite are busy with the sound of their own voices, with the help of mass media, ignoring the real problem and the real needs of the people.

Q: What is the real need of the people?

A: What people need is more economic opportunities, more access and security. In short, they want an encouraging environment for their businesses and livelihood.

In the rural areas, many people are able to solve many of their problems quite well, maybe because they are supported by adequate agricultural activities and products.

The situation is more difficult in urban areas. People have greater interaction with other people; they are more easily influenced, easily provoked, and definitely more sensitive.

Take, for example, the Christmas Eve bombings, it could easily have been done by people so desperate over their poverty that they were easily 'bought' (by people assigning them to do the bombing). It could also have been because they were sensitive and easily influenced.

Q: You mentioned the bombings. What do you know about them?

A: They could have been done by a small group of people suffering from a post-power syndrome. They used to be in power, but they have lost it. Or, they had expected to attain positions of power in this reform era but failed to get them. They might have been frustrated (enough to perpetrate the violence).

Q: Surabaya was spared from the bombing, but small towns like Mojokerto were targeted...

A: I think it was because the ulema and umara (religious leaders and political leaders) work closely (in Surabaya). We work together in fighting terrorism, provocation, threats.

Actually, East Java in general has that basic capital, which is a unity among ulema and umara, and also between different religious leaders or religious organizations.

Q: Rijanto, who was killed in the bombing in Mojokerto, was a member of Nahdlatul Ulama militia Banser...

A: His sacrifice was extraordinary. I think he deserves (current local campaign to have him posthumously declared hero of unity).

Q: Rijanto was killed when a bomb, which he tried to remove from a church's yard, exploded in his hands. What does this act say about Banser?

A: Banser and GP Ansor (Nahdlatul Ulama's youth wing) have commitments to humanity, peace, and unity. Of course, sometimes some members get too carried away and become over sensitive and act beyond the norms and rules. A very small number of Banser members might be overacting and overreacting. Unfortunately, this is what is mostly remembered by people.

Q: So, sacrifice for the sake of humanity is the spirit of Banser?

A: Yes, and this is not new. It has been like that since 1965. But in recent days, I admit that some Banser members go too far as by working as guards for shops or real estates owned by Chinese businessmen, simple and commercial things like that. I think they should be more selective in playing their roles.

Q: There are reports that Banser also backs some gambling businesses in Surabaya...

A: It cannot be true. (They wouldn't go) that far. Banser members would have been expelled from the organization if they had really been involved in such vice. Perhaps people mistook them for members of some other 'forces.'

I don't think this information is accurate. But I will check.