http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/opinion/indonesias-interfaith-dialogue-and-the-reality-of-religious-minorities-neglected-aspirations/550832
Indonesia’s Interfaith Dialogue and the Reality Of Religious Minorities’ Neglected Aspirations Aleksius Jemadu | October 18, 2012 Over the last few years Indonesia has been quite active in promoting interfaith dialogue as a mechanism to address the issue of religious conflict in society. Not only has it become a policy priority of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but on many occasions the Indonesian government underlines the importance of such practices. In fact, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono touched on that issue again when he gave a speech at the UN General Assembly recently. However, it is not yet clear whether or not series of interfaith dialogues that have been organized by the government have had any real impact in terms of religious tolerance in our society. The question becomes all the more relevant if we juxtapose the government’s enthusiasm for interfaith dialogue with the reality of unresolved issues — like the future of the GKI Yasmin church in Bogor. This congregation has been repeatedly disappointed by empty promises made by government officials. Or look at the fate of the Shiite Muslims who still live as refugees in the temporary shelter in Sampang, Madura, or the basic rights of the Ahmadiyah followers who are forced to live under constant fear and intimidation by the radical groups throughout the country. No wonder the Indonesian government has been criticized by the US government and international human rights NGOs for its failure to protect the basic rights of various religious minorities. While we have to appreciate the government’s initiative to provide a forum where religious leaders can get to know each other and exchange views in a constructive manner, there is also the suspicion that interfaith dialogues will only serve certain vested interests of the political elite. The government’s apparent reluctance or powerlessness in curbing the anarchic and violent activities of religious radicals has tarnished its legitimacy and reputation not only in the eyes of its own people but also of the international community. Because there is so much political risk in getting tough on the radical groups, the government has chosen to play it safe by organizing or sponsoring various forms of interfaith dialogue. Thus, instead of addressing the root of interreligious disharmony in society, the government has used interfaith dialogue as a political disclaimer that it has done its job to mediate between different religious groups. In the lead-up to the 2014 general elections, it is expected that political parties will be tempted to mobilize religious sentiment in order to increase their popularity. During Soeharto’s rule it was a normal practice to pit one religious group against another to weaken opposition against the government. Political scientists have tried to explain why any transition from an authoritarian regime to democracy in many developing countries like Indonesia is always characterized by a significant rise of interreligious disharmony or even conflict. One explanation that is quite relevant for Indonesia is given by Michael Brown in his 1996 book titled “The International Dimensions of Internal Conflict.” He says tough competition for political power and economic appropriation in new democracies has created opportunities for pragmatic politicians to mobilize religious sentiment in order to secure power domination or change of the status quo. Thus, the root of the problem of religious conflict has much to do with the standard character of our political leaders who tend to politicize religion for short-term gains and refuse to take the trouble of working hard to win people’s sympathy. If the government does not go beyond the sponsorship of interfaith dialogue and at the same time neglects its constitutional obligation to protect the rights of religious minorities, then we have to question the real motive behind such policy. There is a good reason to believe that the proclamation of this interfaith dialogue policy in government’s policy documents is not free from the operation of power and domination. It is as if interfaith dialogue is all that is needed to maintain the cohesiveness of our nation. Defending the rights of minority groups may not be an attractive option for our political leaders if they only think about how to gain as much electoral power as possible. However, in the long run, as the voters become more enlightened such politicians will be selected out in the process of electoral competition. Regardless of their numerical significance, each one of the religious groups in society should be treated as legitimate seekers of justice and fairness. Otherwise the principle of unity in diversity upon which we build this nation would become meaningless. Aleksius Jemadu is dean of the School of Social and Political Sciences at Universitas Pelita Harapan (UPH) in Karawaci. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
