In the eyes of Timothy Shah, senior Pew Forum fellow in religion and world affairs, the ongoing debate between religion and secularism in Indonesia is part of a global trend. The essay God is Winning, which Shah co-authored with Harvard University's Monica Duffy Toft and published in the July/August issue of Foreign Policy magazine, discusses the growing influence of religion in the world. Shah recently spoke with The Jakarta Post contributor Yenni Kwok.
Question: What was the reason behind your provocatively titled essay, God is Winning?
Answer: We used the phrase because religious organizations, ideas and leaders have played a powerful role in politics since the 1970s. Before World War II, secular ideas dominated. But it started to change some 30 years ago.
Jimmy Carter, the born-again Christian, was elected U.S. president in 1977 and in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal. He promised to uphold morality and decency as president. Khomeini overthrew the Shah of Iran in 1979. Pope John Paul II (who became pontiff in 1978) led a vigorous opposition against Communism. Religion has been playing a larger role in public life.
It does not necessarily mean that people have become more religious, but religion plays a more active role. Some movements are Islamic, some are Christian, Hindu or Buddhist. Some movements are violent, many are not. They differ profoundly in terms of ideologies, political goals as well as tactics.
Could you clarify what 'secularism' means? Does it mean not belonging to any religion, or does it refer to a separation between religion and state?
Secularism is a view that religion shouldn't play a role in politics. Religion might be an important factor in private life but not in public life.
After World War II, post-colonial leaders tended to believe that secularism was a necessary prerequisite to modernity. Jawaharlal Nehru, Gamal Abdul Nasser, Sukarno and Sri Lanka's Don Stephen Senanayake -- they were all secular leaders. At the same time, the most popular movement was communism, which itself was an antireligious, secularist movement. The 1970s marked the increasing decline of communism as it was challenged by religious-inspired movements such as Solidarity in Poland and Mujahiddin in Afghanistan. Religion began to achieve a greater influence and became more dominant. It fills the spiritual void. Even in China, where the ideology is still communism but many people have turned to Christianity, Buddhism or Falungong.
We have heard about the revival of Islam in many Muslim communities, as well as the rise of conservative Christianity in the U.S. Is this a global phenomenon that transcends religious and cultural borders?
It includes all kinds of religions. Other religious groups have also become more active. Hindu nationalists won the elections in India. Look at Japan, where the ruling Liberal Democratic Party has proposed amendments to the constitution to relax the traditional separation between religion and state, while (former) PM Junichiro Koizumi continued to make controversial visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, photographed with Shinto priests. But would you agree religion is used as a political tool?
There are no questions that politicians use religion to boost their support. But the more interesting question is why do they use religion, as opposed to nationalism or socialism. Religion is being used because it has a certain power to move people, it is a powerful force.
A recent survey shows that more Americans believe the U.S. is in a moral crisis because the country has become more secular. By becoming more religious, they can overcome the moral crisis. Most Americans want politicians to be more religious, and want religion to play some sort of role in public life. That's what people are responding to.
How about Europe, which seems to be a bastion of secularism?
It is true that opinion surveys -- including one by the Pew Global Attitudes Project -- show that Western European countries are still relatively secular. But religious issues are increasingly shaping the public agenda. For example, a number of Europe's most contentious public controversies, such as Turkish accession to the EU and the issue of immigration, involve the role of religion in European identity.
What do you think about the current struggles in Indonesia, between religious fundamentalists and moderates, between those who want to include religion in law and politics and those who want to keep religion out of the public realm?
Certainly, it is a very important struggle. Although it might seem the more strict version of Islam is gaining influence, but luckily, this has not become the dominant form. I also sense that Islam has become an identity of a global resistance. When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited Indonesia recently, he received an exceptional welcome not because the Indonesians agreed with this theology. Most fundamentalists are likely to see him as a heretic, but look how he was being welcomed ... and that's because he is seen as standing up against America. He is seen as anti-America and anti-Israel.
Do you believe that this is merely a trend and that the pendulum will swing in the other direction?
To a certain extent, this is a swing of the pendulum. I believe we will see a swing back, just like when many secular movement leaders failed to deliver. It'd be as simple as that. Yasser Arafat didn't deliver, and Hamas won the election. On the other hand, (the Hindu-based) Bharatiya Janata Party lost vote shares in 2004 to the gain of the Congress. There has been some discontent with religious parties, and if they fail to deliver, we will have a swing back to the other way. Maybe it will happen ... but regardless of what happens with the mixture of religion and politics, it will continue to be an important element. What religion will not stop doing is providing order and social services to the community.
No comments:
Post a Comment