Islam, Pancasila, and Politics in Indonesia by Timotius

In the readings of this week, both M. C. Ricklefs and Robert Hefner show us that Islam has played important role in Indonesia’s revolution. Islam in Indonesia has been a strong political power that consistently opposed both Dutch and Japan colonialists. In my opinion, three elements have made Islam a strong political power in Indonesia, i.e. strong religious motive, charismatic leaders, and great number of adherents. It is true that there were many groups of Moslems, which had different political ideals. However, these groups would unite themselves if they found an issue that they regarded as a “common interest” of Islam, or a “common enemy” that threatened them.
The history of Indonesia’s revolution shows us that heterogeneity and pluralistic character of Indonesia’s society had made Islam a dynamic socio-political power. One of important issues in this dynamic is its relation to nationalism. Is there any idea of nationalism in Islam, in which “the nation” is understood as a pluralistic state, instead of an Islamic nation? If Moslem people in Indonesia explored this idea well, Islam would play more important role in Indonesia’s future.
These two articles of Ricklefs and Hefner also make me understand why Pancasila has been a fragile base of Indonesia’s nationalism. It may be true that Pancasila had been a political compromise and had successfully united the ideological diversity in the revolution era (as Abdurrahman Wahid said), but for some Moslems, its formulation was a painful history of betrayal, which could not be easily resolved. Both Islam and Pancasila had shown their good contributions in time of crisis, but their contributions dimmed when the crisis was gone. This phenomenon shows that we need a “proper translation” of both in a non-crisis situation.