http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaileditorial.asp?fileid=20070507.F03&irec=2


Turkey, Indonesia's uneasy ties with secularism 

Daniel Hummel, Jakarta

More than a million people protested the nomination of Abdullah Gul, the 
current Foreign Minister of Turkey, as the Justice and Development Party (AKP) 
choice for president. The protesters's opposition to sharia and a military coup 
d'etat bear witness to a divide in Turkey that has existed since even before 
the republic period following 1923. This divide doesn't exist in Turkey alone, 
but throughout the Muslim world including Indonesia.

First to avoid labeling this as a battle between Islam and secularism, the 
issue rests on Turkey's view of a new way forward without alienating its 
citizenry. Statistics on Turkish society as well as the visibility of many 
movements within it indicate that the populace is beginning to appreciate Islam 
more than it has in the past. This increased appreciation may have given most 
of the support to the AKP and thus placed them as the majority in the 
parliament. 

The protesters may have focused on this as many believe the party leans towards 
Islam. Whatever the reason this uneasy sentiment cast at Islam is the result of 
the flat-lining of global Islamic power. The Ottoman Turks, the predecessors of 
the current republic, developed first under Osman in the 14th century. Osman on 
his death bed told his son and successor, Orkhan, that he was to "cultivate 
justice and thereby embellish the earth. Rejoice my departed soul with a 
beautiful series of victories... propagate religion by thy arms. Promote the 
learned to honor, so the Divine Law shall be established." (Quoted from The 
Ottoman Centuries by Lord Kinross) 

The Ottomans then went on to enter Europe and conquer Constantinople, making it 
Istanbul under Mehmed II in 1453. Mehmed II established secular state law, but 
this law was always subject to review by the chief mufti or Islamic religious 
leader, and could be rejected upon contradiction with the tenets of Islam. The 
administration of the empire was left to a meritocracy of slaves that were 
educated at the Palace School in Islam, the liberal arts, physical arts, and 
math. Mehmed II also pursued the military sciences and the arts, and his 
economic policies were deeply based on the Islamic system of wakaf (endowments) 
and these, along with guilds, allowed the empire to flourish. 

As the empire expanded it was welcomed by many Orthodox and Protestant 
Christians who were often oppressed by Catholic rule in Europe. Tolerance under 
this Islamic state was renowned while different religious communities formed 
self-governing units living under their own laws. This system was directly 
derived from that established by the Prophet Muhammad in Medina. 

Europe both feared and admired the Ottoman Empire. Ten Sultans passed before it 
began to collapse, making it official when under Mehmed IV a second attempt was 
made on Vienna to the demise of the Turkish army. 

This situation persisted until the 19th century when after the religious 
establishment weakened the philosophies of Europe took over. Many Turks began 
to support the nationalist (secular) dream. This culminated in the early 20th 
century when the Turks suffered their final defeat in World War I and Ataturk 
rose as the new leader of the Republic of Turkey. His rise saw a lashing out 
against the only thing that could upset a nationalist state, Islam. Almost 
everything Islamic was forbidden, thus bringing to a close the last Islamic 
power in history. 

Meanwhile, Indonesia on the other side of the Islamic world from Turkey also 
had bouts between secularism and Islam. Under Sukarno in 1945 a preamble to a 
future constitution allowed for inroads of sharia, which was later struck out 
because of fears of succession by the eastern Indonesian provinces which were 
predominantly Christian. 

The removal did not matter in this regards because five years later the 
Republic of South Maluku was declared and had to be quelled by the Indonesian 
forces. The Constitution of Indonesia remained the same, but still possessed 
more religion within it than that established in Turkey. 

Secularism really didn't hit Indonesia until Soeharto in 1965, when the 
military and therefore the civil administration became dominated by nominal 
Muslims and non-Muslims. The enforcement of SARA policy (prohibition of ethnic, 
religious, racial, and inter-group discussions) and the violent actions taken 
towards Islamic movements witnessed in 1984 can be easily mirrored with 
Ataturk's Turkey. The creation of a highly centralized nationalist government 
under such circumstances replicated in many regards the Turkish problem. 

The Muslim-majority nations of today like Indonesia and Turkey continue to run 
under systems largely imported and the people after so many years are not 
content living within them. This means the Islamic states are the most unstable 
and also the most oppressive of their own people to maintain control. This 
oppression precipitates the act of "brain-drain", the flight of intellectuals 
from Islamic countries to Western countries. This causes the lack of scientific 
and intellectual progress in the Islamic world. This also causes terrorism. 

In contrast with Soeharto, who replaced religion with nationalism only, Ataturk 
also replaced religion with science. The replacement has paid off educationally 
for the Turks. That is one-half of what made the old Ottoman Empire great and 
stable, the other half, the drive of religion, is still missing. 

This gap is being felt in Turkish society as well as Indonesian society. The 
absolute secularists push for secularism and the dismissal of Islam may push 
Turkey into a more dangerous place, a place Indonesia is avoiding for now. 

The writer, who holds a BA in international relations from Pennsylvania State 
University, is working with Trisakti University in Jakarta in its Islamic 
Economics and Finance program.

Kirim email ke