Jewish-Muslim relations: Untold story in our history

Fachrizal Halim, Hartford CT

The tsunami tragedy that devastated regions in Southeast Asia causing hundreds of thousands of fatalities opened up a reality that human beings have no boundaries in helping others. When a natural disaster happens, the victims are just human beings regardless of whether they are Muslim, Hindu, or Christian. Our solidarity with the victims of the natural disaster never ceased although all of us are of diverse backgrounds and confined to a particular ethnic identity, religion or ideology.

However, the case will be different when it comes to a political disaster or a religious conflict. Our solidarity with the victims of political problems is sometimes overshadowed by our solidarity with those whose identity we share. As a result, victims of political disaster are sometimes ignored. This is exactly what happened in relation to the current problem between Jews and Muslims and Israel-Palestine. We have deep solidarity with the Palestinians as victims of political tragedy, but we fail to share the same quality of love for Jews who are also the victims of a twentieth century political catastrophe.

The political history of Indonesia holds the clue as to why the issue of the relationship between Muslims and Jews has been ignored in this country. The history of Muslims that have difficulty in dealing with the modern concept of a nation-state has put Muslims in an odd situation, as has happened in almost all Muslim societies. In the situation in which the political language of Islam is prohibited, Muslims have barely been able to articulate and contribute their thoughts for the newborn Indonesia.

The idea of building a pluralist society and to engage in religious dialog was ignored, given that Muslims held an inferior position rather than being equal to those who held Western nationalist thoughts. It was a natural result that the idea of religious dialog and pluralism was not well articulated in this country.

The fact that Indonesia in international relations played its identity with the metaphor of Muslim is another factor. The first two of our presidents, Sukarno and Soeharto, were nationalists and never agreed to establish sharia, although both were pious Muslims by nature. Sukarno, in the early days of the nationalist movement, revealed his vision that he was neither in favor of being a Soviet satellite nor one to embrace a Pan Islamic state.

Sukarno's decision to keep a certain distance from other countries in terms of regional ideology was followed by Soeharto. A nationalist like Sukarno, Soeharto continued the colonial policy of controlling Muslim politics in Indonesia. However, unlike Sukarno, Soeharto built good relations with other Muslim countries. Indonesia joined the Organization of the Islamic Conference in 1969, an inter-governmental organization that aimed to consolidate Muslims whose political ideology was in disarray after the defeat of Arabs during the Arab-Israel War of 1967 and the failure of Arab nationalism.

Indonesia membership in the OIC was a significant phase that later influenced the foreign policy of the Indonesian government toward Israel. Soeharto, at some points, had nothing to do with the conflict in the Middle East. For Soeharto, the OIC was significant only in order to strengthen his legitimacy after his military coup in 1966, in both the eyes of the Muslim world and the Muslim community in Indonesia.

As it was solidarity with OIC members of which Palestine is a part of and to satisfy the Muslims, Soeharto continued to refrain from building a bilateral relationship with Israel. It is in this period that the issue of the Jewish and Muslim relationship narrowed into a political relationship between Israel and Indonesia.

The Palestine-Israel conflict is a barrier that blocks Muslims from having a relationship with Jews around the world. Although the number of Jews living in Israel is small compared to Jews all over the world, it is hard to convince people that not all Jews in the world favor the policy of the Israeli government, partly because Indonesia did not have a positive relationship with Israel.

Abdurrahman Wahid who won the presidential election in 1999 after Soeharto resigned in 1998 corrected this decision. Abdurrahman had tried to restore the Indonesian relationship with Israel and Jews all over the world. However, some Muslims in Indonesia disagreed with him and he was accused of betraying Muslim solidarity with the Palestinians.

After fifty years of being a nation and of witnessing what people all over the world have done for us during the tsunami tragedy, it is necessary to question what we have done for world peace or solidarity and to open a discussion about how we consider Jews and Jewish communities around the world. It is a shame that Indonesia does not have the willingness to reconsider history and not to rehabilitate it.

To correct the worldview of the Indonesian people and the government, especially with relation to its view of Jews and the Israel-Palestine problem is very significant today. We should have the ability to hear and to understand the social condition of the Jewish people, as we have for the Palestinians. It is a fact that the grand history of the relations of Muslims and Jews in the past is forgotten and the contemporary issue is narrowed into the political problem between Indonesia and Israel.

Therefore, in order to heal our relationship with the Jews, the political issue of Israel-Palestine must be confined to the political arena, and the religious significance of having a relationship with Jews, beside relations with Christian Palestinians, needs to be encouraged without political barriers.

The writer is a graduate student of Christian-Muslim Relations, Hartford Seminary, U.S.