<> "The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license."^^ . <> . . . "THE MAKING OF A PANCASILA STATE:\r\nPOLITICAL DEBATES ON SECULARISM, ISLAM AND THE STATE IN INDONESIA"^^ . "Sunan Kalijaga State Islamic University, Yogyakarta\r\nWriting in the early 1970s, B.J. Boland said: “As a ‘Pancasila State with a Ministry of\r\nReligion’, Indonesia chose a middle way between ‘the way of Turkey’ and the founding of\r\nan ‘Islamic State’. A ‘secular State’ would perhaps not suit the Indonesian situation; an\r\n‘Islamic State,’ as attempted elsewhere, would indeed tend ‘to create rather that to solve\r\nproblems.’ For this reason, the Indonesian experiment deserves positive evaluation.”\r\n(Boland 1982 [1971]: 112) Studying Islam in modern Indonesia, Boland concluded that\r\nboth the secular state and the “way of Turkey” and Islamic states are not suitable for\r\nIndonesia. He viewed the Indonesian concept of a “Pancasila State with a Ministry of\r\nReligion” proposed by the founding fathers of Indonesia as a solution to this problem. He\r\nalso suggested that Indonesian experience is a model that deserves consideration and\r\npositive evaluation. As a Western scholar, I suppose, he idealized secular states, yet he did\r\nnot view these as the best model for Indonesia. Boland knew how secularism and Islam\r\nhave long been debated in the country with no concrete result except for the middle way, or\r\nthe third model, of neither a secular nor Islamic state. This is referred to as a Pancasila State,\r\nin which religion is administered and managed by a special Ministry of Religious Affairs Debates on secularism and secularization in Indonesia, as elsewhere, are modern\r\nphenomena.2 In the West, they came after the Enlightenment, and in the Muslim world,\r\nthey came along with the wave of colonization.3 In most Muslim countries, debates on\r\nIslam and secularism end with the victory of one over the other, either with the victory of\r\nIslam, such as in Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Malaysia; or the victory of secularism,\r\nsuch as in Egypt, Turkey and Tunisia. In Indonesia, the debates led to the formulation of a\r\ncompromising ideology, as most Indonesians believe it to be, called “Pancasila” (lit., five\r\npillars). Most mainstream Indonesian Muslims do not consider Pancasila as “secular,”\r\nsimply because it contains the pillar of “Belief in One Almighty God,” and because the\r\nother four pillars are not in contradiction with Islam. As a compromising, synthetic ideology, Pancasila has been officially described as “neither a secular nor a religious\r\nideology” and it has been claimed that Indonesia is “neither a secular nor a religious state.”\r\nHowever, as a matter of fact, there has been a process of both secularization and\r\nreligionization (especially Islamization) in the name of Pancasila, depending on the forces\r\nof secularization and religionization forces in parliament, government and society.\r\nState formation and ideological struggles are important aspects of history that\r\nshould be taken into account when understanding secularism(s) in both Western and non-\r\nWestern societies (Esposito 2009; Kuru 2007). While in many parts of the Muslim world,\r\nMuslim independence movements were dominant, in Indonesia Muslim and secular\r\nnationalist movements equally contributed to the struggle for independence. The slogan of\r\njihad and nationalism were aired side by side, and in some cases even fused to each other.\r\nThe secular nationalist leaders, Western-educated members of the elite like Soekarno and\r\nMohammad Hatta, were even considered to be unifying leaders, or to use Feith’s (1962)\r\nterm, “solidarity makers,” who attracted both nationalist and Islamic groups. There was an\r\nassociation between secularism and nationalist groups, the members of which were mostly\r\nMuslims, as the latter idealised a non-religious, secular nation-state, while there was antinationalist\r\nrhetoric voiced by certain conservative Muslim leaders and organizations both\r\nbefore and after independence.4 However, most of the founding fathers representing\r\nMuslim groups in the sessions before and soon after independence on 17 August 1945\r\nsupported nationalism. Indeed, most post-colonial Muslim countries have been governed\r\naccording to the Western secular paradigm (Esposito 2009), but do not conduct official\r\npolitical debates on religion and state, although intellectual debates do sometimes occur.\r\nThis was the case in Egypt, Turkey (Göle 1996; Navaro-Yashin 2002; Kuru 2009),\r\nTunisia (Moore 1965), and several other secular Muslim countries. Indonesia is one of the\r\nrare cases in which the state encouraged official political debates on the relations of religion\r\nand state between different parties many times—and not just once at the beginning Official political debates were an important medium through which secular and Islamic\r\nparties articulated and communicated their ideological views.\r\nThe present article shall deal with the political debates about secularism, Islam and\r\nPancasila in Indonesian history. I use the term “political society discourse” to refer political\r\ndebates, polemics and controversies that involves political societies, as opposed to civil\r\nsocieties. I use the term “political society” here to refer to the realm in which competition\r\nfor political power takes place. It includes political parties, legislatures, president, and\r\nelections as well as rules of political competition (Linz and Stepan 1996). I will argue that\r\nPancasila—or Pancasila secularism—constitutes, as Abdurrahman Wahid (2001) has\r\nrightly put it, a “mild secularism,” in which relative (not absolute) separation between state\r\nand religion is maintained, but allows at the same time the former’s moderate\r\nadministering of some of the latter’s public affairs, on the one hand, and the latter’s\r\nmoderate values and norms to inspire the former, on the other hand.6 If secularism contains\r\nthree basic theses (Casanova 1994: 3-6), viz., separation of state and religion, privatization\r\nof religion and differentiation between religious and non-religious spheres, they are not\r\nfully and strongly implemented, because there has always been some degree of\r\nreligiousness present, and this could not easily be abandoned. As for the official political\r\ndebates, they were mostly related to the separation thesis, rather than to privatization and\r\ndifferentiation, but there has also been an association of secularism (also in the sense of\r\nseparation) with nationalist groups and of anti-secularism with Islamic groups.7 This study\r\nwill contribute to the knowledge of how secularism has been indigenized creatively as part\r\nof Indonesian political culture. This study will also show that secularism and Islam could mix in their milder sense in order to endorse a more democratic form of politics for\r\nMuslim society.\r\nTo explore this subject, I will focus on political debates during the end of the\r\nJapanese occupation period, in which the concept of Pancasila was first proposed, and soon\r\nafter independence on 17 August 1945, in which the Jakarta Charter was dismissed and the\r\nMinistry of Religious Affairs was established; during the Constituent Assembly (between\r\n1956 and 1959), in which the basis of the state was debated again and the Presidential\r\nDecree was issued to return to Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution, with the Jakarta\r\nCharter as the foundation of the latter; during the New Order, especially in the 1968 and\r\n1983 MPRS sessions in which it was decided that Pancasila would be sole basis of the\r\nstate, and the 2000 and 2002 MPR sessions in which Amendment of Article 29 on religion\r\nwas debated. Without neglecting its importance, I will not discuss non-official debates\r\nduring the Dutch colonial and post-colonial periods, except in passing, because they are\r\nbeyond the scope of my study."^^ . "2012-01-01" . . "6" . . "Sophia Organization for Islamic Area Studies, Institute of Asian Cultures, Sophia University"^^ . . . . . . . . "-"^^ . "MOCH NUR ICHWAN"^^ . "- MOCH NUR ICHWAN"^^ . . . . . . "THE MAKING OF A PANCASILA STATE:\r\nPOLITICAL DEBATES ON SECULARISM, ISLAM AND THE STATE IN INDONESIA (Text)"^^ . . . . . "The Making of a Pancasila State Political debates On Secularism, Islam and the State in Indonesia.pdf"^^ . . . "THE MAKING OF A PANCASILA STATE:\r\nPOLITICAL DEBATES ON SECULARISM, ISLAM AND THE STATE IN INDONESIA (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "lightbox.jpg"^^ . . . "THE MAKING OF A PANCASILA STATE:\r\nPOLITICAL DEBATES ON SECULARISM, ISLAM AND THE STATE IN INDONESIA (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "preview.jpg"^^ . . . "THE MAKING OF A PANCASILA STATE:\r\nPOLITICAL DEBATES ON SECULARISM, ISLAM AND THE STATE IN INDONESIA (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "medium.jpg"^^ . . . "THE MAKING OF A PANCASILA STATE:\r\nPOLITICAL DEBATES ON SECULARISM, ISLAM AND THE STATE IN INDONESIA (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "small.jpg"^^ . . . "THE MAKING OF A PANCASILA STATE:\r\nPOLITICAL DEBATES ON SECULARISM, ISLAM AND THE STATE IN INDONESIA (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "indexcodes.txt"^^ . . "HTML Summary of #16227 \n\nTHE MAKING OF A PANCASILA STATE: \nPOLITICAL DEBATES ON SECULARISM, ISLAM AND THE STATE IN INDONESIA\n\n" . "text/html" . . . "Pancasila" . . . "Politik" . .