Islamic organizations play major role on political stage

YOGYAKARTA (JP): Indonesia's oldest and biggest student organization, the Association of Islamic Students (HMI), recently concluded its congress fending off criticism about its apparent cozying up to the power holders.

The following public debate about whether HMI (established in 1947) should be more independent provoked another question: Where exactly is the place of Islamic youth organizations on today's Indonesian political map?

Political scientist Riswandha Imawan of Gadjah Mada University talked to The Jakarta Post about the issue.

Question: How do you describe the role of Moslem youth organizations in today's politics?

Answer: The majority of mass organizations in Indonesia today are "personalized". People are confused. They cannot differentiate between the organizations and the people (in the organizations). For example, Muhammadiyah (one of the Indonesia's biggest Moslem organizations) is seen as identical with its chairman Amien Rais. Nahdlatul Ulama (the largest Moslem organization in Indonesia) is seen as identical with Gus Dur (nickname of NU leader Abdurrahman Wahid).

That explains why, when we talk about an organization in particular, we sound as though we are talking about their individual figures. It's a "disease" that makes it difficult for us to see if a particular activity is part of an organization or of a person.

When Gus Dur displayed a closeness to Tutut (the nickname of Siti Hardiyanti Rukmana, top leader of the ruling political organization Golkar), for instance, the public could not say whether it was a personal relationship between the two or between Nahdlatul Ulama and Golkar.

And then there's another question of the historical burden that Moslem organizations have had to bear.

Q: What do you mean?

A: (Over the course of Indonesian history) Islamic organizations were the first to become political. For example, when the Islamic Trade Association was founded in 1911, people were able to immediately identify its political orientation, namely protecting the interests of Moslem traders.

By the historical burden I mean that people just assume that Islamic organizations are those that would initiate social change.

During the transfer of power (from the Old Order regime to the New Order in 1965), Islamic organizations played a key role. They mobilized people (in uprising against the regime) and HMI happened to be the most dominant player at the time.

It was also the association of Islamic Students of Indonesia (PII) which was behind the student rallies at the time. (PII had a strong informal relationship with HMI in which most former PII cadres joined HMI when they became university students).

People still see Moslem student organizations in such a light. If you ask about where Moslem student organizations stand in today's political scene, you'll find conflict. Because there is also another factor which wasn't there before.

Q: What is it?

A: Organizations now can be controlled (by the holders of power). They become mere tools. In such a situation, any ideas of change can easily be annihilated by government institutions.

This is seen in any election of an organization. If the government foresees certain elected leaders as potential troublemakers, it needs only to express disagreement with those people. This situation fits the concept that everything should serve (the government's) economic development.

Q: So critics were not exaggerating when they called HMI a mere henchman of authority?

A: HMI is one of the pioneers of the New Order, along with the other people's forces, including the Armed Forces. However, any integration of people's power with the Armed Forces usually results in the disappearance of people's power. The Armed Forces always ends up as the dominant party.

In the case of HMI, I suppose, its role is to filter out any rift or push for change of things which may cause problems to the government. I think it's in this sense that HMI is now dubbed the "security guard" of authority.

Q: So HMI is "used" by the government?

A: This is not something that happens to HMI alone. It happens to all organizations.

In a nation where national stability is seen as the prerequisite of economic development, such a thing is unavoidable. If they (the organizations) want to survive, they need to accommodate government interests.

Q: Is an equal relationship between the government and Moslem organizations possible?

A: People now see Islamic organizations more as a political vehicle rather than as sociocultural or educational organizations. This is (a perception) that some scholars have been trying to correct. Those thinkers include Adi Sasono, Amien Rais, Nurcholis Madjid and others. They keep reminding us that the relationship between the government and mass organizations should be mutual, not that of a boss and his employees.

There are now two kinds of youth groups: those that can be used by the power holders and those who strive to exert social control.

People like Adi Sasono, Amien Rais and Dawam Rahardjo (prominent members of the influential Association of Indonesian Moslem Intellectuals) can be considered as the pioneers of organizations that try to correct social situations. They serve as magnets that attract Islamic students (to join them) no matter what their organizations are. (swa)