NU, Muhammadiyah becoming victims of fighting elephants

An asset of civil society, the 30-million strong Nahdlatul Ulama, is under threat in the current conflict, researcher and executive of Nahdlatul Ulama Ulil Abshar Abdalla told The Jakarta Post.

Question: On Friday President Abdurrahman, or Gus Dur, appealed for patience and questioned the legality of the legislature's special committee looking into alleged scandals; Megawati said the violence in the rallies were unacceptable. Your comment? Answer: Basically violence must be rejected but it is difficult if one does not see the context. We can criticize the commoners (involved in the rallies) but this doesn't tell the whole truth.

My impression is that people in Jakarta, who have not come into contact with the masses themselves and do not know how they feel, easily blame those who cannot channel their restlessness to the media, which is largely controlled by those regarded as Gus Dur's enemies.

They have become victims, and are further victimized.

The people who make them angry seem to have become clean ... it is the status quo which will benefit from all this. When Gus Dur became President the NU kyai finally supported him, but stated that since then Gus Dur no longer only belonged to NU but to the nation ...

The kyai have always been rational and have been able to keep their distance, but every day people hear things that redden their ears on television and radio. When they complain to television with accompanying disturbances they are again scolded so it's like their voices are never heard.

I've just come back from Central Java where one can feel it's so easy for those in the towns to talk ... What is their restlessness that you feel?

It's simple; they love Gus Dur, emotionally they cannot let go of him as their leader, even though he is President, yet they hear words that hurt their feelings; not to mention some preachers who spread hatred against Gus Dur ...

But such things are not mentioned in the media; I think this victimization (of NU members) has gone too far. Has Gus Dur used this support excessively?

Not directly but people would move anyway even without orders. That question must also be directed the other way: are those who hate Gus Dur also using masses?

NU masses poured out after others were mobilized to make Gus Dur fall (from the presidency). But others, coming in nicer transportation and apparently more articulate, are considered more civilized, while those who are pro Gus Dur look like a rabble.

Aren't these NU members also supporters of Megawati?

Yes, the masses of NU and the Indonesian Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) were together in East Java (in the campaigns for the 1999 election). They are both groups of "little people" irritated by what they see on television.

They would surely be confused (by the different cues of Gus Dur and Megawati regarding the rallies); this is the case of the mouse deer being trampled by the fighting elephants. What can Megawati and Gus Dur do now?

The question is really what can all the elite do. It's the action of a few members of the political elite which has led to wide consequences. The problem is more than a memorandum, more than making Gus Dur quit ... The political atmosphere has turned so rotten that people have lost their common sense. The Democratic People's Party (PRD) has been accused of instigating the violence. Do you believe this?

This (accusing PRD) is a dangerous tactic. It's like the NU is again steered towards hating the "communists" (of which PRD has been accused). It was the NU people who were made to kill communists in the past ... This is typical New Order strategy; the words of (Golkar chairman) Akbar Tandjung (accusing PRD) reflects the remains of New Order mentality. NU has stepped further and further away from its roots of being a non political organization. How do you see NU in this condition?

I'm worried that the political conflict will lead to the destruction of this element of civil society. Political parties can be set up in a day, membership cards are easy to issue.

But building a mass organization takes a long time. This is an asset which could be destroyed because of political infighting. I'm very sad of the spill over of political conflict into this civilian organization.

I'm worried if NU people who are angry, get further incensed by townspeople scolding them, and feel they will lose everything if Gus Dur falls from the presidency. Then they will lose Gus Dur, lose NU, lose face ... How do you see the potential of conflict with the other large mass organization, the Muhammadiyah?

It has happened already; those elements of civil society which are important for pluralism are all affected. Would you prefer going through with the formal process which could lead to impeachment?

It doesn't matter anymore, what is four months, five months; Gus Dur will be impeached anyway regardless of whether he responds to the memorandum or not. Megawati would then become President and would also then be toppled.

We'll repeat the experience of the 1950s, and then the military would come into power again.

Without a moratorium on political organizations restraining themselves things will be difficult; the atmosphere is now poisonous, leading to anger and hate. This will benefit the military. Aren't there enough alliances of civilian groups nowadays to fend off such a possibility?

They are still midgets -- only recently gaining freedom and already displaying extraordinary greed. This applies to both Gus Dur's enemies and his supporters. They're all dancing up and down on a stage where planks have just been set in place, and suddenly a truck with a great burden runs over it. Hasn't Gus Dur also had a role in contributing to all this?

He clearly has, just like the others ... we're all in the wrong; It's a zero sum game. You sound sure that the kyai really tried to restrain the masses. Some think the rallies were quite orderly given that the major targets were Golkar offices.

I know they really tried but this anti-Golkar movement will not be very big, there are not enough funds ... Demands to dissolve Golkar were rhetoric from the beginning and is easier said than done.

From South Africa the good lesson to be drawn is that the old forces, (in this case) Golkar, was the ones which for years had the resources. If we were to destroy everything we would have to start from zero.

This is what Gus Dur has been saying, it's not a black and white issue, or we would be entirely totalitarian ...

We should learn to differentiate the good and the bad in Golkar. Even in Germany where the Nazis killed thousands, the party inheriting (its elements) has representation in the legislature, this is astonishing.

What's happening now is revenge towards Golkar. In (the run-up to elections in) 1971, 1977, Golkar's actions towards NU people were outstanding in its forcing of people (to vote for Golkar).

So Akbar's statement of blaming people of anarchy may sound beautiful now but this is without regard to history.

Coercion was most notable in the NU stronghold in East Java, many old kyai also experienced intense repression. But at that time, no one in NU could blame Golkar of anarchy.

But basically, again, violence should be rejected. (anr)