The following may portray the way in which the Indonesian public has responded to the Israeli strikes on Gaza:

1) Condemning the "unjust war" (The Jakarta Post, Dec. 30, 2008) and expressing condolences to its victims;

2) Showing solidarity and making donations, which resulted in humanitarian aid along with the Indonesian Emergency Rescue Committee (MER-C) that reached Amman, Jordan, on Jan. 4;

3) Holding mass protests in many Indonesian cities; and

4) Urging Indonesian Muslims to boycott U.S. products (The Jakarta Post, Dec. 30, 2008).

The first response which emerged from various Indonesian societal groups -- politicians, intellectuals and religious leaders -- and which we have been bored with since the third day of the crisis, has demonstrated good educational reasoning.

Fortunately President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Azyumardi Azra (a Muslim intellectual) and Umar Shihab (of the MUI/Indonesian Ulema Council) all mentioned in their statements that any conflict or violence, regardless of its perpetrators, harms the most essential virtues of humanity.

In particular, Shihab and Azra both emphasized that it is our sense of humanity (not just solidarity among Muslims) that should lead us to show our concerns with the military operation whose victims already included hundreds dead and around 1,000 injured.

Shihab also warned of the irrelevance of the idea of a jihad to Palestine, as proposed by a certain radical group.

The second response -- which included emails circulating on certain mailing lists, attempting to appeal to our empathy with a picture of a dying women and her son -- was also helpful to Gaza victims. The good thing is this solidarity materialized in the form of a humanitarian mission.

Regarding the third and fourth responses, we need to restrain ourselves. As we have seen in many cases in the past, religious sentiments in the Indonesian public are easily exploited by certain radical groups, which always seem ready to grab onto any momentum they can.

As we have seen in the news, certain radical groups, which have already earned public condemnation (due to either their violent track records or extremist ideologies) are now exercising their maneuvers. They are regurgitating the same old rhetoric of hate and blind suspicion -- that enemies are everywhere and have made a conspiracy to destroy Islam and all Muslims around the world. The magnitude of danger of such provocation we have experienced already.

Similarly, not only does the call to boycott U.S. products fail to address the real problem, it also offers no solution. Rather, it creates another bigger problem. We have experienced this already too. It is worth recalling that due to some popular calls in protests over Dutchman Geert Wilders' movie, Fitna, Youtube was blocked in Indonesia, an action which caused nothing but disadvantage to many Indonesians.

As a consequence, we saw how isolated the Indonesian online community became without Youtube, didn't we?

In a similar vein, the call for Indonesians to boycott U.S. products will bring about more damage to our economy which we are struggling to salvage from the brink of everlasting crisis.

As experiences should teach us, we need to be more cautious in stirring public religious emotion in the form of mass rallies, and particularly in isolating perspectives.

It is better to call on the public to remain sober, restrained, moderate and peaceful in expressing their empathy.

Once again, it is unwise to lean excessively toward one extreme or side with one party with a one-sided perspective. Indeed, it is not easy to expose two balanced perspectives. On the contrary, sticking with popular views with popular support seems comfortable and beneficial.

The Gaza crisis -- and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in general -- whose matters are complex and delicate, requires a workable solution. And yet Indonesia, whose Muslim population is the largest in the world, may -- and has tried to -- play a certain role in seeking this, although we Indonesians do not necessarily fully understand the core dilemma, e.g. between Hamas, Fattah and Israel.

But Indonesia, in terms of location, is far away from the conflict zone, a fact which may offer a rather unique insight.

Radicalism in Indonesia, which has been triggered by (among other things) the Israeli-Palestinian conflicts, is never a solution but adds to the problems.

Solidarity for injustice can lead to at least two conflicting actions: generous alms giving or extremism. Regarding the latter, let us recall the interviews with Imam Samudra (who was executed for his role in the Bali Bombings) which are still available online.

In one such interview, Samudra wears a blue shirt with no collar, and a black scarf around his head, and expresses his bitter disappointment with the current global political situation which is full of injustices, he says. Samudra repeatedly says the "enemy" has conspired to destroy Islam and Muslims, citing the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

It stands to reason to expect that certain radicalists will soon claim their violent acts in the name of Gaza victims, even in places far removed from the conflict zone. The perceived present injustice may indeed trigger radicalism as history and religion seem only to serve as safe havens for radicalist arguments.

As recorded in many interviews with Samudra, he rarely cites verses of the Koran or hadiths which, if he had, could have served to enhance his first argument, namely his perception of injustice.

Here, wisdom and a cautious approach will help us to play a better role in seeking a solution. At the same time, we must restrain ourselves from radicalizing grass-roots groups for any purpose or interest.

The writer is a lecturer at Sunan Kalijaga State Islamic University, Yogyakarta.

Popular

Ministry orders remote working for civil servants to help ease traffic congestion

Netanyahu vows victory after Iran strikes, fears of wider conflict grow

18 people killed in South Sulawesi landslide