Posted on 09/19/2007 6:47:25 PM PDT by Alouette
The Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI) hosted the International Khilafah Conference last month. Since this event, Indonesian mass media has been discussing the pros and cons of implementing a caliphate system in Indonesia which involves the formal application of shari'a as the legal code for the umma - Muslim community, under a head of state, or a caliph, who traditionally had both political and spiritual authority.
Those who are for the implementation of such a system, especially the HTI itself, cite that the obligation to enforce a caliphate system is based on the religious order to establish God's law for the believers. This political transcendence seems to have a special appeal, one that drove thousands of Muslims to crowd in Gelora Bung Karno Stadium in Jakarta in support of HTI's vision. Given the huge number of people attending the event, one begins to wonder if the idea of establishing caliphate system would become a threat to the current democratic political system in Indonesia.
However, others view the idea of enforcing a caliphate system more as historical romanticism or idealization than a mature political proposal. The desire to build a single Muslim polity under a caliph is considered a utopian dream. Moreover, those against the idea emphasized that the political reality of a nation-state, with a modern democratic political system as its foundation is not compatible with the caliphate system as suggested by HTI.
The most significant issue about the debate is the implication of HTI's campaign of the establishment of a caliphate system for the future of democratic rule in Indonesia. HTI's concept of a caliphate system is often categorized as a very radical resistance toward the existing global system. Like most Islamic political movements, however, it should be understood as a desperate attempt by Muslims to deal with the turmoil that resulted from the abrupt modernization that occurred in most Muslim-majority states.
In this case, HTI argues that a caliphate system is only an alternative to the current system. It proposes that equal rights, justice, accountability, and good governance can exist outside of a Western constructed definition of democracy and has the potential to be upheld in other political systems.
FOLLOWING this argument, Islam, with a particular reading of the Koran and hadith, has a mechanism that reinforces the social frameworks that are currently adopted by modern communities, such as democratic practice of politics, civil society, multiculturalism, and rational bureaucratic structures. In the Koran, the righteous are described as those people who, among other things, manage their affairs through "mutual consultation" or shura.
In addition, the constitution of Medina during the time of the Prophet Muhammad established the importance of consent and cooperation for governance. According to this compact, Muslims and non-Muslims were equal citizens of the Islamic state, with identical rights and duties.
On the other hand, the extensive interpretation of Islamic norms will immediately show that a caliphate system proposed by HTI is not an absolute Islamic political system. A political system of the past, the caliphate system is no more than one possible political structure. It means this system has the potential to be partly accepted or completely refused by Muslims.
As a concept, the caliphate system as proposed by the HTI should be appreciated as an alternative political system and not as a threat toward democracy. One must remember that in the beginning of the 20th century, the world had witnessed the emergence of fascism and communism as neutral alternatives to democracy. Fascism and communism became threats to democracy only after Hitler and Lenin marshalled their troops to conquer Europe.
It is when different political systems are portrayed as a polarized dichotomy, with room for either one or the other in our international system, that one system becomes a threat. As long as it is campaigned for in a peaceful way and is as compatible or at least complementary to democracy, the same analogy should be applied to the caliphate system proposed by HTI.
Ultimately, history will determine which system, or systems, will survive.
Our common future is hopefully one in which all religious communities will live side by side in peace. The different political aspirations of religious communities should not be defined as a clash. On the contrary, it should be understood as an opportunity given by God to appreciate differences in the various faiths and to love others. At the end, this will give all sides an opportunity to show a collective commitment to the value of equality and justice. Only in this way, we hope that Indonesia will become a natural home where democracy can prosper.
The writer is a PhD candidate in the history of Islamic law at McGill University, Montreal, Canada. www.commongroundnews.org
Warning! This is a high-volume ping list.
I suppose this is meant to be reassuring.
Recall, much of Indonesia is barely a century beyond customary head-hunting and reportedly, cannibalism.
Place could get out of hand fast.
Recall, much of Indonesia is barely a century beyond customary head-hunting and reportedly, cannibalism.
Place could get out of hand fast.
Sharia law is a complete negation of hundreds of years development of principles and practice supporting modern representative government. Serious Islamic thought only allows for a brief period of cooperation with democratic forms of goverment before submerging it.
I believe that Mohammed did some troop marshalling himself and the result has been the Long War that started almost 1400 years ago and is still in progress. There has been some back and forth but a lot of land has been conquered by Mohammed's troops.
Do you masticate your food?
yes or no?!
Especially the part that says: "One must remember that in the beginning of the 20th century, the world had witnessed the emergence of fascism and communism as neutral alternatives to democracy."
What IS reassuring is that, obvioulsy, nitwits CAN qualfy for higher education.
This Tahrir group is gaining ascendency rapidly. Do not forget the Muslim Brotherhood, a recent topic in posts on FR. Here is a Swedish relalted comment by Fjordman on the threat and inroads MB has made in Sweden..it is well established in over 70 countries...http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2490
This link is for the first of a four part series (the 4th part deals with the growth of Hizb ut-Tahrir in the US and why it should be banned here. Read all four parts..here is the link for the first part: http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/index.php?id=1345561
Our common future is hopefully one in which all religious communities will live side by side in peace.
Excuse me? WHO do you think you are fooling Fachrizal Halim? Your "Islamic law" specifically prohibits this co existence with "Infidels" or pagans. Give the radically secularist nature of most of Europe and the USA, there can be no peaceful coexistence with a "caliphate" and us under the very law YOU are supposedly an expert on.
There are two chances of Indonesia turning into an Islamic Caliphate; a dog’s chance and no chance, and the dog just died.
There was a hullabulloo on the web about this HIB rally in Jakarta but 95% of Indonesians were blissfully unaware that it took place, I was in Jakarta that day and the first I heard about it was when the BBC led with it on their bulletin that night.
HIB wanted 100 000 people to gather at the stadium, there are 240 million Indonesians, 90% of whom are Muslims, how many showed up? 70 000 and 80% of them were middle aged housewives who wanted to see their favourite folksy imam who used to have a regular Sunday afternoon tv slot before he was dropped for taking on a second wife. Where were the men? Well there were a couple of big soccer matches in town that day and Indonesian men have a lot more sense than their wives when it comes to spending Sunday afternoons.
Of the leading speakers planned for the event, seven didn’t show up because they were refused entry by the Indonesian government, given that some of these speakers were British and Aussie it reflects well on the Indonesians’ ability to control their own borders compared to many western states.
If Hizbut Tahir want to use Indonesia to launch the global caliphate they are going to have a long slow job. The UK, France and Holland will be Islamic states long, long before Indonesia gets around to bothering with it.
you got that right-some decades back,there was an abortive communist takeover attempt in indonesia-a number of generals were assassinated and the resulting payback was very bit as vicious as what went on in rwanda,with lower casualties albeit
They are not far removed from the jungle (if removed at all).
The culture of the people in a place often has no relation to an organized cabal who, in essence, hijack it. I’ve often heard that the Indonesians are easy-going folks who are the most tolerant in all of Islam. That won’t prevent a small group of tyrants from assuming control.
On the other hand, much of what is now Indonesia was inpenetrable jungle up to a hundred years ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.