D

espite the fact that Muslims make up the majority of its population, Indonesia is a secular country with respect for a variety of religious beliefs. The first principle of Pancasila, the foundation of the nation, and Article 29 (1) of the 1945 Constitution clearly state this. Accordingly, the Indonesian government guarantees the freedom of its citizens to embrace any religion and profess their beliefs.

Based on the explanation of Presidential Decree No. 6/1965 and Presidential Decree No. 5/2000, the state officially recognizes six religions, which are Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism. The explanation also says that other religions are acceptable as long as they are not in violation of Indonesian laws and regulations.

Many Western countries have praised Indonesia as a country with a moderate majority Muslim population. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described Indonesia as proof that Islam and modernity can coexist. This suggests that Islam in Indonesia is in accordance with principles of democracy and human rights.

Contrary to these two facts, Indonesia has experienced a spate of incidents that demonstrate real levels of religious intolerance. Although to a greater extent, inter-religion relations in Indonesia are filled with cooperation, some scholars perceive that tension also mark their relations.

The increasing number of restrained churches and other Christian institutions, assaults on Ahmadiyah followers, coupled with other civil conflicts that were partly triggered by religious issues, significantly demonstrate these levels of intolerance.

There are three inter-related reasons why religious violence and intolerance occur in Indonesia. First, to some extent, this country’s multi-cultural and ethnically diverse make-up results in a strengthening of xenophobia (hatred of strangers) due to cultural and identity distinctiveness.

It is interesting to examine how Huntington’s theory in “Clash of Civilization” becomes provocative. Samuel concluded that conflicts in the modern world happened not at the level of states, but between groups of different civilizations.

Although Huntington was referring more to the Western and Islamic civilizations, he assumed that the differences of religious and cultural attributes bring about conflict between civilizations inevitably.

In his book Culture and Organizations: Software of the Mind (2005) Geert Hofstede defines culture as ways of thinking, feeling, and potentially acting that are learned throughout one’s lifetime. And since culture is learned from one’s social environment, culture is always performed as a collective phenomenon. It is at least partly shared with people who live within the same social environment.

Therefore, as postulated by Hofstede, culture is a collective programming of the mind that distinguishes members of one group from others. This arises the feeling of “in-group” (groups to which a person belongs) and “out-group” (groups to which a person does not belong).

The “in-group” and “out-group” feelings subsequently tend to cause collective identity not merely based on cognition but also emotions such as fear, anger, hate and irrational hostility. Consequently, people become subjective and have biased perceptions about their “in-group” and “out-group” status.

Second, the failure of secular states, including Indonesia, to provide socio-economic welfare or create greater income equality, potentially opens a greater opportunity to political Islam. Many scholars interpret political Islam as an extension of Islamic beliefs, values and culture outside the proper religious domain. Some believe that Islam is an integrated totality that offers solutions to all problems of life, including social, economic and politics.

The disappointment of Muslim societies with secular government in Iran, for example, consequently calls for a more active engagement in politics. The transformation of Iran into an Islamic Republic in 1979 played a crucial role in the modern advent of religious terrorism, according to Bruce Hoffman (2006).

At its bottom line, Iran’s Islamic Revolution became a campaign to extend the fundamentalist interpretations of Islamic law to other Muslim countries, including Indonesia.

Unlike in the New Order era, the Indonesia’s reform era apparently brings oxygen to political Islam. Indeed, political reforms encouraged not only the creation of Islamic political parties, but also the development of socio-religious movements.

Yet, as confirmed by Muslim scholar Bahtiar Effendy, rather than responding to Indonesia’s democratic transition, these movements emerged as instruments to actively express Islamic aspirations and a reaction to the socio-religious and political situation of the time.

The reaction is particularly directed against the “out-group’s” culture and activities that are perceived as being at odds with their “in-group” culture. This distinction is certainly applied based on their ideology and methodology.

Eventually, the inadequacy of the government to provide laws regarding religious harmony, as stated by Deputy Religious Affairs Minister, Nasaruddin Umar, (The Jakarta Post, April 24) and the lenient punishments for perpetrators of religious violence permit Islamic radical groups to continue their actions.

The 17 people responsible for the destruction of churches in the Central Java town of Temanggung, for example, were sentenced to only 4-5 months in jail and the murderers of 3 Ahmadiyah members were jailed for only 3-5 months.

In the end, this suggests that law enforcement and inter-religious dialogues accommodated by the government are crucial. Otherwise, the religious violence is likely to continue. Improving the capability of security agencies to protect minorities and take actions to deter religious violence is equally important.

However, the skill without the will is nothing. The willingness of the government to create a improved access to socio-economic welfare and education is the key to reducing the intolerance.

And last but not least, the will of government to maintain a nation-state system based on Pancasila, “Bhinneka Tunggal Ika” (Unity in Diversity) as well as positive law is certainly needed.

The writer is a lecturer at the School of Social and Political Sciences at the Indonesian Christian University, Jakarta.