• Tentang UGM
  • Portal Akademik
  • Pusat TI
  • Perpustakaan
  • Penelitian
Universitas Gadjah Mada
  • Home
  • About Us
    • About CRCS
    • Vision & Mission
    • People
      • Faculty Members
      • Visiting Lecturers
      • Staff Members
      • Students
      • Alumni
    • Facilities
    • Library
  • Master’s Program
    • Overview
    • Admission
    • Courses
    • Schedule
    • Scholarship
    • Accreditation
    • Crossculture Religious Studies Summer School
    • Student Service
    • Survey-2022
  • Article
    • Perspective
    • Book Review
    • Event Report
    • Class Journal
    • Interview
    • Wed Forum Report
    • Thesis Review
    • News
  • Publication
    • Reports
    • Books
    • Newsletter
    • Monthly Update
    • Infographic
  • Activities
    • Film
      • Indonesian Pluralities
      • Our Land is the Sea
    • Research
      • Overview
      • Resource Center
    • Community Service
      • Wednesday Forum
    • International Events
      • ICIR
      • Interfaith Mediation
      • IGSSCI
    • Student Achievements
  • Beranda
  • Thesis Review
  • The ambivalent role of religion in the Ambon conflict

The ambivalent role of religion in the Ambon conflict

  • Thesis Review
  • 6 November 2018, 13.24
  • Oleh: Admin Jr
  • 0

The ambivalent role of religion in the Ambon conflict

Ach. Fatayillah Mursyidi – 6 Nov 2018

The Ambon conflict is said to have started on January 19, 1999, which coincided with the celebration of the Islamic holiday of Idul Fitri, when a quarrel between two young men, one a Muslim and the other a Christian, in the Batu Merah terminal ended with a physical fight. It soon escalated into ethnoreligious conflict and communal riots in many parts of Maluku, particulary in Ambon and Halmahera islands, claiming a minimum of 5,000 lives and hundreds of thousands being displaced.

The major narratives spread out across Indonesia during the Ambon conflict were about separatism, ethnicity, and religion. The separatism narrative referred to to the view that this conflict was supported by a group called Republik Maluku Selatan/RMS, a name reminiscent of the past movement that during the still early age of Indonesian independence demanded separation from the Republic. This view was strengthened by the declaration of the Forum Kedaulatan Maluku/FKM. Another narrative described it as an ethnic conflict between indigenous Ambonese and the so-called BBM (Bugis, Buton, Makasar) ethnic group. The most influential narrative, however, was the one that categorized this conflict as a religious one. And, Marthen Tahun’s master’s thesis at CRCS UGM (2007) titled “The Ambiguity of Religion: A Study of the Ambon Conflict, 1999-2001,” deals with the question on how religion played one or more roles in the conflict.

Tahun’s thesis began by elaborating some background of the conflict. Historically speaking, Christians and Muslims in Ambon share the Nunusaku tradition, binding and uniting both through the so-called pela, a traditional practice recognizing that, despite differences, they come from common ancestry. But with the advent of immigrants, pela can also be prone to be used to divide ethnic groups considered indigenous to the land of Maluku from those considered outsiders. It was this divison, once taken into the advantage of the Dutch colonial regime’s “divide and rule” strategy, that had given an ease for ethnoreligious conflict to occur.

Contributing factors to the conflict also include the pre-1998 economic crisis, which was followed by the fall of Soeharto and the transition to the Reformasi era. The then economic and political instability led to a rapid increase of unemployment, triggering frustrated people to identify blameworthy groups. Another contributing factor was the involvement of non-Moluccans in the conflict, such as the Yogyakarta-based Salafi group Laskar Jihad, coming to Ambon supposedly to help Muslims. And, the military intervention provided arms to the conflicting groups, which also consisted of child soldiers.

Starting from the premise that “religion cannot stay innocent in the face of violence in Ambon”, Tahun’s thesis argued for the view that religion played two contradictive roles: it legitimated for both conflict escalation and resolution. Drawing on three prominent scholars of religious studies, (R. Scott Appleby, Charles Kimball, and Charles Selengut), Tahun contended that religion contributed to the escalation of conflict in several ways. First, religion provides a basis for exclusive identity. In fact, two conflicting parties in the Ambon conflict wore a colored badge: white for Muslims and red for Christians. Second, religion sanctifies certain symbols or places, a vilification or destruction of which will elevate anger to a high extent. Third, religion produces a charismatic figure, which in the case of Ambon conflict was exemplified by Ja’far Umar Thalib, the leader of Laskar Jihad who inspired the many voluntary fighters coming to Ambon. Fourth, religion can make wars holy and eschatological. The members of Laskar Jihad believed that the conflict has an existential threat to Islam and so they wanted to defend God’s glory in the land.

On the other hand, however, religion can also become a stimulant in the process of conflict resolution. Looking at the roles of religious leaders, Tahun’s thesis told that religion also provided a strong call for peace, exemplified in the establishment of peace initiative movements and non-violent campaigns. Religious leaders in this regard play a decisive role to remind people about religion’s goal to preserve the sanctity of humanity. In fact, in the midst of the conflict, some peace initiatives were established, i.e. GPM Crisis Centre by Protestants, Amboina Crisis Centre by Catholics, and Al-Fatah Mosque Post by Muslims, providing medium for everyone to share their problems and resolve their discontentment though a peaceful dialogue.

Tahun’s thesis indeed echoes a traditional view studied under the subject of religious violence, i.e., to borrow a title of Appleby’s book, “the ambivalence of the sacred”. A highly philosophical discussion can be derived from this, that is, on whether or not religion has an essential element in itself that contribute to the escalation of conflict, or it was more of an instrument used by some elites for their advantage. A future research can begin from this question as a few other researches have suggested that one of the major, if not the most, contributing factors to the conflict was the communal cleavage along ethnoreligious lines that had been long nurtured by the New Order regime, some remnants of which were opposed to Reformasi and so tried to divert the agenda of power restructuration by playing the card of ethnoreligious conflict.

_____________

Ach. Fatayillah Musyidi is CRCS student of the 2018 batch.

Tags: conflict resolution fatayillah mursyidi maluku

Leave A Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Facebook

Facebook Pagelike Widget

Instagram

Beberapa waktu silam, kami berkunjung ke Lasem unt Beberapa waktu silam, kami berkunjung ke Lasem untuk studi lapangan. Kota kecamatan ini memang terkenal dengan toleransi dan harmoni masyarakatnya yang berlatar belakang Jawa, Cina, dan Arab. 

Namun, selama perjalanan kami di sana, ada yang mengganjal. Kami tak banyak menemui orang-orang keturunan Tionghoa di ruang publik secara aktif. 

Simak catatan reflektif dari @astridsyifa tentang eksistensi masyarakat keturunan Tionghoa di daerah yang pernah berjuluk "Little Tiongkok" ini di situs web crcs ugm.
Bagi sebagian besar yang merayakan, tahun ini adal Bagi sebagian besar yang merayakan, tahun ini adalah tahun kelinci air. Namun, di Vietnam, ini adalah tahun kucing. 

Sementara itu, sebagian komunitas keturunan Tionghoa di Tanah Melayu merayakannya sebagai tahun kancil. Iya betul, si kancil yang kerap dituduh mencuri timun oleh pak tani. Padahal, kancil mencuri timun karena hutannya habis dibabat oleh manusia. 

Apa pun hewan yang mewakili tahun ini, semoga damai bagi semesta sepanjang masa. 

xin nian kuaile, gongxi facai
Bagaimana jika ajaran agama saya memerintahkan say Bagaimana jika ajaran agama saya memerintahkan saya untuk membunuh manusia lain, sementara perbuatan itu dianggap melanggar hukum oleh negara? Apakah artinya kebebasan beragama saya sedang dikekang?

Apakah kebebasan beragama berarti juga bebas berganti-ganti agama? 

Kebebasan beragama ternyata tidak sesederhana soal seseorang bebas memilih dan menjalankan agama yang ia yakini. 

Dalam bukunya 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘙𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘍𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘰𝘮 (2012), Arvind Sharma mengupas tuntas berbagai problematika Kebebasan Beragama atau Berkeyakinan dan Bung @vikry_reinaldo mengulasnya dengan apik.

Ulasan lengkapnya bisa dibaca di situs web crcs ugm.
Secarik oleh-oleh dari Seminar Agama-Agama (SAA) P Secarik oleh-oleh dari Seminar Agama-Agama (SAA) Persekutuan Gereja-Gereja Indonesia (PGI) sekaligus refleksi Natal dan Tahun Baru untuk Indonesia yang beragam dan inklusif dari @ika.iku.aku 

Selengkapnya di situs web crcs ugm
load more... @crcs_ugm

Twitter

Tweets by crcsugm

Universitas Gadjah Mada

Gedung Sekolah Pascasarjana UGM, Floors 3-4
Jl. Teknika Utara, Pogung, Yogyakarta, 55284
Email address: crcs@ugm.ac.id

© CRCS - Universitas Gadjah Mada

KEBIJAKAN PRIVASI/PRIVACY POLICY

[EN] We use cookies to help our viewer get the best experience on our website. -- [ID] Kami menggunakan cookie untuk membantu pengunjung kami mendapatkan pengalaman terbaik di situs web kami.I Agree / Saya Setuju