In essence, ‘Islamis’ refers to those individuals or groups who advocate the ideology of Islamism. Islamism is a political ideology with religious undertones. It is not based on faith but rather on the ideological application of religion in the political sphere. Islamists are committed to shaping a new social and political order by placing Islamic teachings at its core.
In Indonesia, the emergence of Islamic groups began after the downfall of the centralist regime in 1998. They appeared in various forms and with specific ideas. There are at least two major factions within the Islamic groups. First, there are those who tend to see Islam as a substantial instrument. They focus on the importance of nurturing and fostering a religious community without institutionalizing Islam.
Secondly, there are groups oriented towards formalism. These groups adhere to the doctrine of ‘innal al-Islam Din wa Daulah,’ which means ‘Islam is both a religion and a state.’ They agree that Islam is a socio-political system where the functions of religion and politics cannot be separated but must be formalized and legalized under one umbrella known as the ‘Islamic State.’
However, these groups have different approaches to achieving their goals. Some establish Islamic political parties and other Islamist instruments, effectively becoming ‘Institutional Islamists.’ Others take a militant path through ‘jihad amar ma’ruf nahi munkar’ (enjoining good and forbidding evil), which can be referred to as ‘Jihadist Islamists,’ as described by Bassam Tibi.
Over the years, Islamic groups have been active in propagating their beliefs in the public sphere. They found a significant moment of unity in the 2017 Jakarta gubernatorial election, particularly in their opposition to Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (Ahok). Ahok, the incumbent governor, ran for re-election but faced allegations of blasphemy against Islam, specifically related to Quranic verses. Islamic groups mobilized in large numbers against him.
Islamic groups formed an alliance with Anies Baswedan, Ahok’s main rival, to defeat him. This led to heightened political tensions, as Islamic groups campaigned with a strong religious and divisive tone. Anies Baswedan emerged victorious, but the consequences included a fractured religious harmony among Jakarta’s residents.
Two years later, instead of dissipating, political tensions escalated during the 2019 presidential election, pitting Joko Widodo-KH Ma’ruf Amin against Prabowo Subianto-Sandiaga Uno. Unlike the 2017 election, the impact extended nationwide, affecting the entire Indonesian population.
Islamic groups shifted their support to Prabowo-Sandi and employed the same strategy as in the Jakarta election, using identity politics. Prabowo-Sandi was portrayed as the embodiment of Islam, while Jokowi-Amin were considered anti-Islamic, even labeled as representing Islamophobia due to their perceived mistreatment of religious scholars. Consequently, what was essentially a profane presidential race turned into a holy war in defense of religion.
The 2019 presidential election witnessed a surge in populist political Islam, where religious identity was used as a tool to stir emotional Islamism and garner electoral support. Over time, polarization between these factions intensified, with derogatory terms like ‘cebong’ and ‘kampret’ used to mock one another. Religious narratives were also loudly proclaimed daily to convince the public.
From the above analysis, it is evident that merging political interests with religion has brought about significant challenges. It is crucial to closely examine the steps taken by Islamic groups—both Institutional and Jihadist—in the upcoming 2024 elections to prevent a repeat of such incidents.
As of the time of writing, there are three prominent figures vying for the presidential seat in the 2024 elections: Anies Baswedan, Ganjar Pranowo, and Prabowo Subianto. If there are no last-minute changes, these three figures are likely to be officially nominated as presidential candidates by the General Election Commission (KPU). This implies that Islamic groups are likely to align themselves with either Prabowo Subianto or Anies Baswedan.
Supporting Ganjar seems unlikely, if not impossible. Ganjar is affiliated with the PDI Perjuangan party, which Islamic groups strongly oppose due to its perceived criminalization of religious scholars, submission to oligarchy, and support for blasphemy. As described earlier, historical political events suggest that only Prabowo and Anies have received support from Islamic groups.
However, considering the current political landscape, these predictions may face challenges and potential setbacks. Islamic groups were disappointed when Prabowo accepted a ministerial position in the Indonesia Maju cabinet, leading to a decrease in support for him.
It may be assumed that Islamic groups will firmly support Anies in this context. However, the declaration of Cak Imin (from PKB) as a vice-presidential candidate has also generated disappointment among Islamic groups, as stated by Novel Bamukmin (Deputy Secretary-General of PA 212) in an online news portal, Tribunnews. Furthermore, PKS is reconsidering its support after Anies chose Cak Imin as his running mate.
The question then arises: where will Islamic groups align themselves? Will they stay out of the 2024 election? In my opinion, this is unlikely. Islamic groups are not entities that lack maneuverability. The strongest reason for Islamic groups to remain engaged is the historical significance of 2024, which marks the centenary of the fall of the Ottoman Empire. According to their claims, in accordance with a prophetic tradition, a reformer (mujaddid) will emerge. Therefore, Islamic groups are expected to be highly active in the lead-up to the 2024 elections, as it represents a crucial moment in the transfer of power. Moreover, this election does not feature an incumbent, making the outcome highly unpredictable.
In conclusion, regardless of where Islamic groups align themselves, we must remain vigilant. We should not fall into the trap of identity-based political maneuvering. Oppose the politicization of identity!
*translated from here.