Ted Meinhover

The anniversaries of the bombings in the popular Indonesian tourist destination of Bali were recently noted in Indonesia, Australia, and around the world. There is no obvious answer as to the root causes of the movement that seems to be at the root of these phenomenons, although the situation has become very simplified in the minds of many. Indonesians practice an Islam unique to that of any other place, a practice that is incredibly diverse within itself as well. It is important to understand the implications of radical Islam in Indonesia, with the largest Islamic population in the world, and the implications it has for countries around the globe.

Violence and terror erupted on the other side of the world for the first time in October, 2002, on that idealistic island in equatorial South East Asia. Watching on my TV in the cool autumn of Minnesota, it was impossible for me to conceive of the causes, let alone the meaning and implications, of what had taken place. Placing it within the context of the WTC attacks of 9-11 seemed to make the events more understandable in the popular media. I never guessed that I would find myself, four years later, in the same country that was briefly highlighted by the media as a hotspot in a growing network of global terrorism.

Now, at the anniversary of that first bombing and the bombings that have followed almost annually here, the “war against terror” continues, and Indonesia once again flashes across the televisions of America. What is really happening in this massive country, with its hundreds of languages, thousands of Islands, and millions and millions of citizens? Indonesia is, in fact, the world’s fourth largest population with about 222 million people, 88% of which make up the single largest Islamic population.

Traditionally, the Islam of Indonesia has been viewed as a moderate one, similar to its peaceful neighbor Malaysia. Both countries practice a form of democracy, and both have pluralistic societies. Indonesia, unlike Malaysia, is not an Islamic state; while God is recognized in the state’s philosophy, Islamic law is not a part of the country’s laws. Not right now, anyway.

A military coup took over the young democracy in the 1960’s, ousting the first president Sukarno and replacing him with an authoritarian oligarchy led by president Suharto. This, the New Order regime, lasted until 1998, when the economic crisis and a rising social movement brought about the fall of Suharto and the “Reformasi” period.

While “Reformasi” brought a truer democracy, there are obvious benefits to the kind of authoritarian regime that was in power prior to 1998. In terms of the rise of radical groups, the most obvious is that the government does not exercise the same violent suppression that it used against many groups, including such radical groups, for many years.

Malaysia, in contrast, also has a pluralistic population with a Muslim majority. It exercises a much more controlled form of political democracy; while people can join political parties based on religion, they are tightly controlled, and the same structure has maintained power since Malaysia’s independence. Political organizations that challenge this status quo, are suppressed, though perhaps not violently.

With the fall of Indonesia’s New Order in 1998, the government lost much of its ability to control the political organization of its population. The scene went from a few, watered down parties to a cascade of political parties from the entire spectrum. Fundamentalists were not able to manifest themselves politically prior to ’98, as in Malaysia and Singapore today, whereas now they can.

While there has been a huge increase in the number of Islamic organizations in the country, this should be seen in the context of the fact that there was zero tolerance prior to 1998. NU, Nahdatul Ulama, a moderate and progressive Islamic organization, is still the largest organization in the country by far. Muhammadiyah is another of the largest organizations, and is described as prescribing to Reformist Islam.

However, the ironic fact remains that increased democratic rights in Indonesia has left open a space for a fundamentalist minority to organize. It is not politically feasible for the government to simply ban certain Islamic groups based on fundamentalist teachings, but the government has also been criticized as not exercising the political will to clamp down on those groups that have obviously gone too far.