‘Tjilik Riwut Strategy’ to Guard Indigenous Harmony

‘Tjilik Riwut Strategy’ to Guard Indigenous Harmony

Moh Yasir Alimi, A SENIOR RESEARCHER AT THE CENTER FOR MULTICULTURALISM,

DEMOCRACY AND CHARACTER BUILDING, SEMARANG STATE UNIVERSITY

Sumber : JAKARTA POST, 14 Februari 2012

There is now an effective strategy to combat religious violence and the influence of violent groups: Surround their plane and prohibit propagators of violence from disembarking and stepping foot on your land.

This strategy can also be metaphorical: Surround the carriers of violence, prevent inciters of violence from spreading influence in your land to destroy the long-standing tradition of tolerance.

This strategy can be called the “Tjilik Riwut” strategy; a strategy demonstrated by local Dayak protesters who refused to permit the presence of an organization that often incites violence, disharmony and intimidation in many parts of Indonesia.

Motivated by the desire to protect indigenous peace and religious harmony in Central Kalimantan, local protesters surrounded a plane carrying four senior officials of the Islam Defenders Front (FPI) who had come there to inaugurate a branch of their organization in Central Kalimatan.

The four FPI elites were eventually forced by local authorities to fly to Banjarmasin. Commenting on the incident, a colleague said, “Imagine if in Banjarmasin they were surrounded by another mob and were forced to fly to Jakarta. And if in Jakarta they were surrounded by another mob. Perhaps such a strategy will end the violence, intimidation and the raids of this organization against religious minorities.”

A similar case occurred in 2008. Banser, the youth wing of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), dissolved the branch of the organization in Jember, East Java, after the paramilitary organization insulted Gus Dur, then chief patron of NU, and attacked peaceful protesters in National Monument (Monas), Central Jakarta, celebrating the anniversary of Pancasila.

Enraged by the insult, Banser also raided FPI members in Lamongan, East Java, and “marked” individuals who had become members of the FPI after the incident in Monas. At the same time, the National Declaration Movement was initiated in Bali and was dedicated to shielding the nation from the rising influence of radicalism.

The rejections of the Dayak community in Kalimantan, Muslims and non-Muslims in Bali, Java and many other areas in Indonesia make sense. Indonesian communities — Muslims and non-Muslims — are fed up with the organization, which has incited violence in the name of religion, but still remains untouchable.

Violent organizations, or organized thugs, are a real challenge to state authorities. When the state seems to be powerless against vigilantes, people will move to protect their dignity.

Since its declaration in 1998, the FPI has set upon systematic nationwide acts of violence. It has incited many vigilante actions against, among others, Ahmadiyah followers and the congregation of the HKBP Church in Bekasi, West Java.

Rather than maintaining a marginal image, violence, including coercion, intimidation, raids, destruction of property and violence, has been the central strategic aspects of the FPI movement. The FPI has been willing to use violence and intimidation as its main tactics in building influence.

Not only non-Muslims, Muslims alike are also the targets of the FPI. The FPI has intimidated activists from the Islamic Liberal Network (JIL), attacked peaceful protesters celebrating religious freedom in Monas, and damaged statues in public spaces that they deemed un-Islamic. In Purwakarta, West Java, statues representing characters of widely popular local puppet theater, such as Bima, Werkudara and Janaka, were destroyed.

The FPI’s main activities traditionally focused on raiding night clubs selling alcohol. The activities of the organization, however, have been expanded to intervention in conflicts over places of worship in Jakarta and its surrounding areas. The most recent case was the damage caused to the front entrance of Home Ministry.

The activities reveal that there has been a major ideological transformation within the organization. It was first in the form of the Pamswakarsa militia created by the Indonesian Military (TNI) during the reformasi era to guard the peaceful transition to democracy, but was only centered in Jakarta.

The organization, however, has become a very active organization and is widespread across the country. Researchers, such as Zachary Abuza, estimate that the FPI claims about 100,000 members and has branches in 22 provinces.

According to Ian Wilson, since 2003 the FPI has transformed itself from “an unruly bunch of thugs in religious garb” to “a far more disciplined and ideologically oriented paramilitary force”.

What needs to be considered given such a transformation is that the new terrorists grew out of vigilantism, as exemplified in the case of Ahmad Syarip, the suicide bomber of a mosque in Cirebon. Syarip had been actively involved in the raids against alcohol and in intimidation against Ahmadiyah followers.

Moral reasoning has been the argument often used by the organization to justify its actions. But the transformation has illustrated that the organization was no longer the organization as we knew it during the New Order era.

It is now an organization which confidently uses violence. That is why it threatens the foundational principles of a secular democratic state. Moreover, in its mission statement, it is stated that the organization is dedicated to the complete implementation of sharia (kaffah).

Analyzing violent groups in the post-New Order Indonesia, Ian Wilson observed that paramilitary groups, such as the FPI, are a major challenge to restoring confidence in state institutions. To restore public trust in state institutions, the government should have a clear cut action plan to deal with violent organizations.

Grown out of the Pamswakarsa, the FPI previously received support from the Jakarta Police and the TNI commander at that time: Gen. Wiranto. The links between certain elites and the FPI have been a source of FPI confidence.

The elites have nothing to do with religion, but their interest in the FPI is related to jockeying for political influence. The strength of the FPI represents the weaknesses of the government against violent organizations and the elites behind them.

“Surrounding the Tjilik Riwut plane strategy” is an expression of civil frustration against the ignorance of the central government in guarding long-standing religious tolerance and freedom. They are tired of language games played by the certain Jakarta elites in regard to these organizations.

In response to the ban in Central Kalimantan, the FPI elites said that the event “could potentially cause horizontal conflict and threaten the stability of the nation”. They also say that freedom of expression is not protected here. These statements are more relevant if addressed to the organization itself, rather than the Dayak protesters.

To protect religious harmony, the state could adopt the Tjilik Riwut strategy by suppressing the trend of religious violence through compulsory adherence of every organization to the guiding principles of Pancasila. This strategy could at least curb radical organizations from gathering further political influence. ●

The rise of new leaders and the bankruptcy of political parties

The rise of new leaders

and the bankruptcy of political parties

Moh. Yasir Alimi, A RESEARCHER AT THE CENTER FOR CULTURAL PLURALISM, DEMOCRACY AND CHARACTER BUILDING, SEMARANG STATE UNIVERSITY

Sumber : JAKARTA POST, 17 Januari 2012

Though the specter of violence — religious, political and communal — pervaded the tone of 2011, the year also witnessed the rise of new promising national leaders.

These leaders successfully revived hope and humanity, which were to some extent devastated by the moral violence and political degradation of 2011.

The potential leaders include Mahfud MD (the current chief of the Constitutional Court), Joko Widodo, popularly known as Jokowi (the Surakarta mayor) and Dahlan Iskan (the State-Owned Enterprises minister).

Mahfud bravely challenged the violence so often tolerated by high-ranking state officials. He also sent a clear message about violence, state brutality and the absence of the state in safeguarding the spirit of the nation. His move against Nazaruddin and Andi Nurpati revealed his courage in uncovering the dirty tricks often played by politicians to bury black cases.

Leading the Constitutional Court, Mahfud offers hope about improvements to the country’s justice system, in which it is widely perceived that money talks given that the system largely sides with those who possess power and money.

The next potential leader is Jokowi, who became popular because of his human touch in dealing with the street vendors who occupied the main roads and city parks of Surakarta.

He patiently negotiated with the street vendors so they agreed to relocate to new sites that he had prepared. He successfully won their cooperation after 56 meetings.

Besides providing new sites for the street vendors, Jokowi also advertised the new locations in the media for six months so that they would become known to both locals and tourists in Surakarta.

Eleven associations of street vendors, which between them account for almost 1,000 vendors, eventually accepted Jokowi’s offer despite having previously refused the same proposal put to them by Surakarta’s three prior regents.

During the relocation process, Jokowi also organized a number
of cultural events, including a festival and a parade by the Surakarta Royal Guards corps, which offered a sense of pride and nationalism to the traders.

In return, the mayor placed a small financial burden on the relocated street vendors, charging each of them only Rp 2,600 (28 US cents) per day for their new sites.

Jokowi’s bold move, however, was his decision to use the Esemka Rajawali, a sport utility vehicle (SUV) produced by students from Surakarta’s vocational high schools as his official car. His move has drawn controversy but the people side with him because he is setting an example of living a modest life; of taking the lead in the “love our national products” campaign and promoting this brilliant achievement by the nation’s children.

Meanwhile, Dahlan is popular because of his informal, modest and simple style in simplifying the complicated bureaucracy of state companies. His journalistic experience has helped transform the complex bureaucracy. He did not mind riding on ojek (motorcycle taxis) and trains to experience first-hand the public transportation services, as some public transportation providers come within his ministry’s remit.

The question is: What do these new potential leaders offer on the sociology of leadership and the trends and forces that might shape Indonesian politics in the future?

Mahfud has a background as a university lecturer and a student activist, Jokowi as a businessman and Dahlan as a journalist and businessman. Despite their different backgrounds, personalities and areas of concern, however, they share similar characteristics.

First, they have character and courage. A strong character, honed by years of getting in touch with the people, helps these new leaders to shape and transform the corrupt and immoral way of thinking and codes of conduct that have for years dominated our politics and bureaucracy.

Second, they are tolerant, inclusive and committed to pluralistic principles. Their popularity is a sign of Indonesian’s thirst for tolerant and fearless leaders to set
by example the ways of tolerance and pluralism.

Third, they share a strong commitment to humanity and moral values. They are willing to listen to people and treat them as human beings — not as a collection of two-dimensional figures.

Fourth, they live simple and modest lifestyles, in stark contrast to most members of the Indonesian elite who are occupied with material greed and conspicuous consumption that results in moral degradation. The tendency for greed and consumption has triggered rampant corruption in this country.

Surprisingly, none of the three has direct links with any political party and their rise to prominence, therefore, indicates that political parties have failed to nurture the rise of character and dignified leaders from within.

Politicians have been occupied with greed, consumerism and corruption, thus creating an assumption that political parties are the institutionalized means to serving greed, consumerism and corruption. Such conditions will desensitize young politicians and make them into something that is far removed from the reality of the people.

During the reformasi (reform) era, we had strong leaders such as Abdurrahman Wahid, Megawati Soekarnoputri and Amien Rais, who were powerful against the mighty Soeharto because of their positions as leaders of mass organizations.

Mahfud, Jokowi and Dahlan do not have such mass support. But they have all the capacity to get such support. Their rise to prominence is a fundamental sign that the nation has changed. The nation’s people are bored with the political system, which is corrupt, violent and insensitive to its citizens. ●

A man of God, a man of humanity

A man of God, a man of humanity

Moh Yasir Alimi, A RESEARCHER AT THE CENTER FOR CULTURAL PLURALISM, DEMOCRACY AND CHARACTER BUILDING AT SEMARANG STATE UNIVERSITY

Sumber : JAKARTA POST, 30 Desember 2011

Abdurrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid, the fourth president of Indonesia, a great ulema and a man of humanity, is no longer with us, but he is not dead. Neither is he in the grave. He lives in us.

His human touch and spirit — for justice, freedom, humanity, tolerance, decency and simplicity — live and rise as ripples and then as waves of love within many hearts. A teacher of love and compassion, Gus Dur remains a fearless defender of tolerance, pluralism and constitutionalism.

In front of him, you were precious not because of your religion, wealth, affiliation or social status, but because you were simply human. The fact that you were human gave the man enough reason to respect you. That was his religiosity.

He welcomed me so warmly when I requested a letter of reference for my doctoral studies. One time he phoned Father Erary, a Catholic priest in Papua, at midnight during a presidential visit to Washington, just to listen to his opinion.

Gus Dur passed away on Dec. 30, 2009. But his wisdom prevails. In our present world, degraded by violence, hatred, cruelty and greed, Gus Dur’s humanity is more relevant than ever before.

The humanist spirit of Gus Dur — religion with sacrifice, tolerance, justice, democracy, constitutionalism and spirituality with love — was well summarized in a dangdut song titled “Pendekar Rakyat” (The People’s Hero) performed by Sagita.

“Although your eyes are blind

Your heart is with sight

You know which one is a cat and which one is dog

It doesn’t matter whether you are NGOs or parties, organizations or community activists

The most important is the character

I remember your simple advice

Religion should protect the universe.”

Gus Dur’s conviction that religion should protect humanity and universe remains absolutely true. The fundamental objective of religion for Gus Dur was to protect life, because every life is sacred.

Religion, in his own words, should “reflect God’s mercy and compassion, and bring the blessings of peace, justice and tolerance to a suffering world.”

Thus, it is grossly irreligious to hurt, hate and discriminate against other people because of their religious views. Gus Dur did not only believe in the sacredness of life, but also in the unity of humanity.

There are many faiths, but there is only one humanity. That is why, for Gus Dur, the Muslim majority was obligated to protect the non-Muslim minority in Indoensia.

The next legacy of Gus Dur is his consistent teachings about constitutionalism. People often use religious prescriptions to judge what happens in the public sphere, such as in the Ahmadiyah case. For Gus Dur, this was unacceptable. He taught us to hold to constitutional principles instead of sharia, because Indonesia is not an Islamic state.

Gus Dur also taught us to be just and honest. To the young generations, he underlined the importance of being just and honest over being smart. Oft questioned as to why he defended the minority so strongly, he replied that justice was more important than solidarity in injustice.

Finally, Gus Dur was a man of God. He taught Muslims to surrender to Allah, the Almighty, instead of becoming slaves to their egos and greed. Religious violence and conflict occur because of human egos and spiritual impoverishment. Muslims should gain enlightenment to free themselves from their egos, greed and hatred.

To reach enlightenment, as he advised his youngest daughter, one needs to be drowned in nothingness or God’s consciousness to enter the divine presence. Only in the divine presence can one strip off the desires of ego and grow the wings of love needed to can fly.

It is this energy of divine love that rises as wave in his heart that gives him energy and courage for his patience, compassion, humanity, humor and devotion to pluralism and social justice.

At the center of Gus Dur’s consciousness was the idea that the very essence of being an ulema was to embody loving and caring rahman rahim and then channeling that compassion and mercy to the universe for the whole of humanity.

Ulema are not a set of attributes, religious symbols or the guardians of religious doctrines. Ulema should be a manifestation of divine love on Earth.

Gus Dur expressed that divine love in his decency and simplicity. As one person once said: “I am blind about Gus Dur. But I like him because of one thing. He is simple. And simplicity is the best dress for an ulema.”

For Gus Dur, the heart of religion was sacrifice and love without which religion would be, in the words of Steven Covey, “just another hierarchical system”, “outward observances” and “visible accoutrements” without “a sense of service or inner worship”. Such outward religiosity is dangerous, according to Covey, because it is “neither God-centered nor principle-centered”.

With all those characteristics, it is not surprising that Gus Dur is remembered and loved. Though he was almost blind, he was the one with true sight among us, the blind.

Though he was in a wheelchair, he was the one who taught Indonesia to walk along the path of democracy.

Gus Dur is no longer with us, but Gus Dur is like a pebble dropped in water that vanishes, as James W. Foley described in his poem. “But there are half-a-hundred (perhaps endless) ripples circling on and on and on/ Spreading, spreading from the center, flowing on out to the sea/And there is no way of telling where the end is going to be.”

Let the memory of Gus Dur warm our hearts and help us to handle the hatred and violence that dominates our public life today. Remembering the spirit of Gus Dur, let us embrace the words of Rumi: “Be a lamp, or a lifeboat, or a ladder. Help someone’s soul heal. Walk out of your house like a shepherd.” ●

The conspious consumption

The conspious consumption

Moh Yasir Alimi, A RESEARCHER AT THE CENTER FOR CULTURAL PLURALISM, DEMOCRACY AND CHARACTER BUILDING AT SEMARANG STATE UNIVERSITY

Sumber : JAKARTA POST, 19 Desember 2011

The revelation of inflated bank accounts belonging to low-ranking civil servants and corruption charges levied against young politicians challenge us to examine the sociological fabric that underlies corruption in Indonesia.

The fabric has provided cover to the young politicians and bureaucrats to disregard the anti-corruption campaign waged by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).

Corruption suspects and convicts have held sway in the media, desensitizing the young about other human problems reported in the news, such as poverty, more than 21,000 decrepit schools, the denial of healthcare to poor people in East Java and the suicide-by-self-immolation of a student protester.

The immersion of youth in corruption has broken many hearts, especially those who rely upon the idea of “fresh blood” as a strategy for curbing national leadership crises.

Many young politicians have become ensnared in corruption and are now rotten eggs that should be discarded. Look at the House of Representatives, where young politicians are confidently and outspokenly attempting to eliminate the KPK.

Like the young politicians, the young bureaucrats do not want to be left behind and want to get rich fast. Without the knowledge and approval of the supervisors, the rookie civil servants could not have accumulated such large amounts of money.

There are two possible ways the bureaucrats could have obtained such high bank balances.

First, they might have operated projects through shell companies prepared by their bosses to channel projects from the ministry.

Second, they might have connected contractors with their bosses and reaped money from “entertainment” packages.

Ministries are the cash cows of political parties and civil servants who work in ministries led by politicians are richer than those run by experts.

In ministries that are not controlled by politicians, high-ranking bureaucrats hold budget power and do not necessarily pay ransom to political parties.

One can easily see that the amount of money amassed by young civil servants does not represent the total amount of money in circulation. Many transactions are conducted in cash, or laundered in the form of houses, property, land, cars and luxury goods under the names of family members or close friends.

The young are doing dirty work, despite anticorruption campaigns, because of the high pressure for “conspicuous consumption”, that is, the continuous display of status or wealth taking the shape of luxury consumer goods typically purchased in the cathedrals of consumption in Jakarta or Singapore.

Conspicuous consumption is a phrase coined by Thorstein Veblen to indicate new practices of consumption where the new rich display what they have to gain public admiration.

According to Veblen, the rich think that their previous leisure activities do not demonstrate their status enough. By purchasing luxury cars, big houses and the most advanced flashy gadgets. they can display their social status and renew their self worth.

In conspicuous consumption, wealth and its display become the measure of the status of a person. In some circles, it is required in order to maintain the good opinion of others and as badge of group membership for a particular social status.

Sociologically, conspicuous consumption is learned through advertisements, family and particularly peer interaction.

In the circle of politicians, showing property and expensive cars in interaction among politicians has become the measure of success, self worth and social status.

As the lifestyle of the affluent becomes a frame of reference, young politicians endeavor to emulate the super-rich people who lead political parties.

Interaction with rich, seasoned politicians drives the young politicians to join the ranks of successful politicians and reach the state of normalness as defined by the most affluent politicians.

In that pattern of peer interaction, politicians tend to become a group of consumers and agents of conspicuous consumption rather than representatives of their constituents. The legislative body is no more than the house of conspicuous consumption.

The war on corruption does not seem to scare people because the pressure to show status and achieve happiness through the possession of luxury goods intensifies.

Social studies observe the downsides of consumerism. Conspicuous consumerism weakens solidarity, democracy and the legitimacy of the government.

A group of researchers from the University of Minnesota recently observed that conspicuous consumption is driven by the desire for short-term mating motives.

They suggest that “flaunting status-linked goods to potential mates is not simply about displaying economic resources”, but also about “part of a more precise signaling system focused on short-term mating.”

With conspicuous consumption, corruption has reached its level of perfection. Whereas inflated accounts are a form of corruption by power abuse, consumerism is corruption of soul.

In that kind of crisis, bureaucratic reform cannot fix the problem without character reform and leadership, which has the capacity and capaciousness to guide the nation to the importance of contentment.

The next national leader should be one who is not enslaved by his or her desire and one who can say with confidence that “happiness is not in things; it is in us”. ●