On sectarian policy

Minister of Defense and Security Eddy Sudradjat's recent statement calling on various existing intellectual associations to unite into a single "national" organization is apparently the latest word in the current public debate over the future of the so-called intellectual associations. Sudradjat said such an alliance would certainly indicate stronger national cohesion and unity.

For decades, intellectuals have played an important role in shaping this country's politics. But it was not until four years ago, following the formation of the Moslem Intellectuals Association (ICMI), that their role has taken a new turn. Initially set up by a handful of students from the Brawijaya University in Malang, East Java, under the chairmanship of the "strongman" State Minister of Research and Technology B.J. Habibie, ICMI has stormed its way into Indonesian politics and eventually, with the support of President Soeharto, became quite influential.

But the formation and existence of ICMI has upset many people here. For one thing, they believe that it is a setback to our national unity, since ICMI, bearing the label "Moslem" in its very name, could be considered nothing but "sectarian" -- a far cry from our sacred 1928 pledge (17 years before independence) that we will be one nation, with one country and one national language.

Thus it is understandable if the Armed Forces (ABRI), which claims to be the guardian of our national unity, is the one which is the most unhappy with ICMI. But with the strong, though tacit, support of President Soeharto, who apparently needs a new constituency and so has played his Moslem card, nobody was bold enough to oppose ICMI's conception.

Along its political journey, however, it could soon be seen that ICMI is divided into two main factions: the bureaucrats and the political activists. The latter group reportedly became disenchanted and upset after it turned out that it was the bureaucrat faction which gained the upper hand, after it acquired several ministerial seats in the cabinet, as well as other influential positions. The activists had to be content with remaining in the back seat.

On the other hand, apparently alarmed by the formation of ICMI, other "sectarian" intellectual groups have sprung up or re- emerged, notably PIKI (Christian), ISKA (Catholic) and FCHI (Hindu). Another newcomer is the Association of Indonesian Nationalist Intellectuals (ICKI), which reportedly should have been established last week, but due to certain technical reasons has delayed its emergence.

The appearance of diverse sectarian groups -- coupled with indications that, indeed, sectarian and "primordial" (extremely biased) ways of thinking and sentiments are rapidly on the rise as seen in developments over the last several years -- have alarmed many people who see the new phenomenon as a threat to our national unity.

Minister Sudradjat's call on the various associations to merge into an Association of Indonesian Intellectuals (ICI), then, could be seen as an effort to defuse the "bomb." We are afraid, though, that Sudradjat's call will meet deaf ears. For one thing, ICMI's rapid ascendancy in Indonesian politics has already put them in a lofty position and, according to the political maxim, no one who has the upper hand will want to relinquish his power voluntarily.

Besides, if ICMI has now become an effective political machine (despite repeated denials from its board of executives), who wants to loose such a formidable instrument? And even if ICI could be established, ICMI would surely dominate it and eventually that would create new conflicts.

The existence of various "sectarian" intellectual associations is a consequence of our current political system. We cannot escape it. Besides, the freedom to associate is guaranteed by the Constitution.

What saddens us is the double standard that is apparently being exercised by the government in the application of that freedom. While intellectuals are seemingly relatively free to form various organizations, other professional groups are barred from doing the same -- workers and journalists, for example. But then, perhaps, there is some truth after all in the old saying that politics is nasty.