Muslims in Southeast Asia need enlightenment

Muslims in Southeast Asia in general are tolerant and moderate. Therefore they need to be helped in maintaining this tradition. In a conversation with The Jakarta Post's Kornelius Purba, Dr. Surin Pitsuwan, during the recent Asian Statesmen Forum in Bali, shared his view about Islam based on his experience as a Thai Muslim and former Thai foreign minister. Surin, an advisor to the Geneva-base Henry Dunant Centre, also talked about the situation in Aceh.

Question: What is your view about Islam in Southeast Asia?

Answer: In general, Muslims in Southeast Asia are tolerant, moderate, and very accommodating, partly because when Islam came to this part of the world, the region was already very much influenced by other cultures and civilizations of the east, like Hinduism and Buddhism. And therefore the Muslims were in a position to make accommodations; to interact, to adapt and adopt various ideas, values, and practices, so long as that did not contradict drastically with the cardinal principal of Islamic faith, for example the idea of one God, the idea of practicing the ritual and tradition, rules and the declaration of Islam.

And people in the region themselves are very accommodating and flexible, so there had been experiences of mutual accommodation, mutual respect. The end result is that Muslims in Southeast Asia are quite ready to accommodate changes to adopt new ideas, new approaches to their own problems, problems of globalization, problems of modernity, living with each other in an environment of diversity. This is the uniqueness of Muslims in this region.

Q: Has that situation remained after Sept. 11?

A: After the Sept. 11 tragedy, there was much concern of how to engage the Islamic world, and ... we offer a very unique opportunity. In the past the Muslims, the Arabs, had contributed to the evolution, the transformation of Europe. The wisdom of the Greeks was kept alive and flourished, and was nurtured, reinterpreted by the Arabs, by Muslim scholars, and then passed on to the West, to Europe during the dark ages. And the result was renaissance. Later on of course reform, enlightenment, the industrial revolution and many other things.

I think now the reverse could happen; the developed part of the world, west or east, could also help the Muslim community, especially in Southeast Asia, because it is ready, it is flexible. You begin here and try to support this effort for reform, revival, efforts for a true renaissance. In the past three decades you have seen a lot of crisis of resurgences of the Muslims. And that was a reaction from the Islam side to much pressure from outside, pressures for globalization, pressures for changes, for modernity.

But now the real renaissance could be conceived with the support of a more developed world, which has benefited from Muslims in the past; so to achieve a true renaissance to development, to science and technology through human resources development. I'd love to see that. It will certainly help reduce the high level of mutual ignorance, mutual understanding, distrust and confidence, among the two communities; that is between the developed part of the world and Muslims.

Q: How about Muslim terrorist links in this region?

A: The real roots of this violence is the lack of engagement with globalization because of the lack of education, lack of opportunity. So this problems is internal, internally generating, internally caused. But it does not mean that the outside community does not have a role to play. There is no direct relation may be, between poverty and terrorism, but certainly, poverty and the lack of opportunity and quality to benefit all changes that are taking place, contribute to the frustration.

The competition is very fierce; you need to prepare yourself for competition. If you fail to compete, what can you do? If are you are denied the opportunity, you can be frustrated. (Then) you are likely to fall victim to other forces. That could be drugs, violence, other forms of transnational crime. You are engaged in shady activities, like human trafficking, gambling, extortion, or any kind that would allow them to at least in a way compensate for the lack of opportunity.

The argument that poverty has nothing to do with terrorism is problematic, because the next logical steps (would be that) the world has no concern or sense of responsibility to help in the eradication of poverty. So you have to be very careful, to use the argument that it is nothing to do with poverty, that you therefore can keep them languishing in poverty without any responsibility. That is very dangerous, and makes the world very divisive.

Q: Do you have any particular feelings as a Muslim in predominantly Buddhist Thailand?

A: Thailand is a Buddhist majority country, but it is very open, and accommodating. The King is supreme patron of all religions, he is the figure head and the patron of all communities. The space is unlimited for everybody to make a contribution, to play a role in the economic and political life of the country. As a Muslim I have found that there is no limit as long as you are qualified, you can compete, no problem.

Q: As an advisor to the Henry Dunant Center, how do you see the situation in Aceh?

A: I think the commitment from both sides, the Indonesian government and the GAM (Free Aceh Movement) has been progressive, in the sense that rather than using force and oppression as the means to solve the problem, both sides have agreed to use dialog. We are on the right trick. I am very honored to be a part of this dialog process; respecting the internal nature of affairs of Indonesia, the Henry Dunant Center is only helping to facilitate the dialog process ...

We are not mediators or negotiators. It is the parties who are talking with the facilitation of the center. The four of us, including U.S. Gen. (ret.) Anthony Zinni, the "Four Wise Men", are helping the Center. But I think the dialog process is moving ahead ... And we hope that some effective and sustainable resolution will be found.

Q: What are the most delicate problems in Aceh?

A: Again this is an internal matter. But as long as both sides realize that violence is not the way to solve the problem, it is a good beginning. It is an issue of mutual confidence, development, poverty reduction and cooperation.

Q: How about human rights problems?

A: That is the issue that both sides have to discuss. The issue has been very much on the priority list of both sides, and that is the consequence of violence. Both sides realize that they have made efforts to reduce violence, and must create mutual confidence.