MUNAJAT-DISSERTATION.Pdf (6.119Mb)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FPI (ISLAMIC DEFENDERS’ FRONT): THE MAKING OF A VIOLENT ISLAMIST MOVEMENT IN THE NEW DEMOCRACY OF INDONESIA A Dissertation by MUNAJAT Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2012 Major Subject: Sociology 1 FPI (Islamic Defenders’ Front): the Making of a Violent Islamist Movement in the New Democracy of Indonesia Copyright 2012 Munajat 2 FPI (ISLAMIC DEFENDERS’ FRONT): THE MAKING OF A VIOLENT ISLAMIST MOVEMENT IN THE NEW DEMOCRACY OF INDONESIA A Dissertation by MUNAJAT Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Chair of Committee, William Alex McIntosh Committee Members, Dongxiao Liu Rob Mackin Rola el-Husseini Head of Department, Jane Sell May 2012 Major Subject: Sociology 3 iii ABSTRACT FPI (Islamic Defenders' Front): the Making of a Violent Islamist Movement in the New Democracy of Indonesia. (May 2012) Munajat, B.A., State Islamic University (UIN) Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, Indonesia; M.S. Leiden University, The Netherlands Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. William Alex McIntosh The current study is aimed at investigating the puzzle of why FPI (Islamic Defenders’ Front) has chosen to adopt violent strategies within the democratic context of Indonesia. Much of literature on social movements suggests that democracy is inherently nonviolent because it allows social movements to use a number of reasonable tactics to pursue their goals. On the contrary, authoritarianism is considered to be the cause of the emergence of violent movements. However, a violent movement is not necessarily absent in the context of democracy. Using the language of Islam, justice and democracy, FPI (Islamic Defender’s Front) conspicuously committed at least 64 cases of violent collective actions from 1998 to 2010. Three levels of analysis are used in order to investigate this social puzzle, namely the level of organization, individual characters and FPI’s violent actions. Combining these three levels of analysis, this study found that the making of the violent Islamist movement (FPI) is complex and interconnected. First, there are at least four social iii iv environments that have led FPI to the adoption of violent means. They are the historical context of Islamist movements in Indonesia (1945-1998), the timing of violence by FPI, social support for FPI’s violent actions and low state capacity. Second, there are at least four factors that relate to individuals and organization of FPI. They are FPI’s encounter with so-called justified violence, FPI’s engagement in violence-prone activities, fundamentalism and FPI’s framing of its violent actions. Combining these factors has made FPI’s violence become more persistent in the new democratic context of Indonesia. Consequently, despite the fact that democracy inhibits political violence, democracy may also allow the use of violent means by social movements. In doing so, democracy opens an opportunity for people, especially elites, to support the cause of violence. Therefore, this can undermine the government’s will to fully suppress the violent movement. In addition, there are other significant factors, other than state repression, that also facilitate violence, such as a movement’s choice to engage in violence-prone activities, low state capacity, a good timing of violence (cultural resources) and a good framing of violence. iv v DEDICATION Dedicated to my wife Annisa, my daughter Leidena and whoever sacrifices her/his time to read this piece of work. v vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my committee chair, Dr. Alex McIntosh and my committee members, Dr. Dongxiao Liu, Dr. Rob Mackin, and Dr. Rola el-Husseini, for their guidance and support throughout the course of this research and my study in Texas A&M University. Thanks also go to my friends, colleagues and the department faculty and staff for making my time at Texas A&M University a great experience. I also want to extend my gratitude to Aminef and Fulbright, which have made me a Fulbright Aggie, to the Department of Sociology Texas A&M, Writing Center Texas A&M, American- Indonesian Cultural & Educational Foundation (AICEF), STAIN Salatiga and Department of Religious Affairs Republic of Indonesia, which provided me with valuable support, resources and assistantship during my study at Texas A&M, and to all my respondents (activists of FPI, Muhammadiyah and NU), who were willing to participate in the current study. Finally, thanks to my mother and father for their encouragement and to my beautiful soul mate and daughter for their patience and love. vi vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. iii DEDICATION .......................................................................................................... v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................... vi TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................... x LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... xi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 1 II LITERATURE RIVIEW ...................................................................... 6 Political Environment: State-Centered Perspective ....................... 6 Framing Aspect .............................................................................. 10 Characteristics of Individual .......................................................... 12 III THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ....................................................... 19 Qualitative Theoretical Framework .............................................. 19 Political Process Theory ............................................................ 19 Framing Process Theory ............................................................ 22 Quantitative Theoretical Framework ............................................. 23 Fundamentalism ........................................................................ 24 Trust in Government ................................................................. 29 Political Efficacy ....................................................................... 30 Violent Attitudes ....................................................................... 32 Hypotheses ................................................................................. 34 vii viii CHAPTER Page IV METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 36 Qualitative Methodology ................................................................ 36 Data ........................................................................................... 36 Analysis ..................................................................................... 38 Quantitative Methodology ............................................................. 39 Data ........................................................................................... 39 Analysis: SEM (Structural Equation Modeling) ....................... 43 Model Specification .................................................................. 45 Estimation .................................................................................. 46 Model Evaluation ...................................................................... 49 V ORGANIZATIONAL BACKGROUNDS: HISTORICAL CONTEXT, ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE, IDEOLOGY AND FPI’S ADOPTION OF VIOLENT MEANS ........ 51 Towards Radical Islamist Movements: the Early Tensions of Islam-State Relations in Indonesia .............. 51 The Tensions of State-Islam Relations during the Early Years of Indonesia (1945) and the Sukarno Regime (1945-1966) ....... 52 The Tensions of State-Islam Relations during the Suharto Regime (1967-1998) .................................... 58 The Emergence of New Democracy .............................................. 62 The Birth of FPI (Islamic Defenders’ Front) ................................. 66 Organizational Structure ................................................................ 70 The Demand for the Application of Shari`ah (Islamic Shari`ah) .. 76 AMNM (Amar Ma`ruf Nahi Munkar): Definition and Procedures 80 Jihad, the Extension of AMNM (Amar Ma`ruf Nahi Munkar) ...... 83 Justifying Violence ......................................................................... 87 Moving towards FPI’s Adoption of Violence ................................ 89 VI CHARACTERISTICS OF INDIVIDUAL ACTIVISTS IN RELATION TO VIOLENCE ............................................................... 92 Data Description ............................................................................ 93 Reliability and Validity .................................................................. 95 Preliminary Analysis: Mean Differences of the Observed Variables ................................ 98 Model Results ................................................................................. 102 Summary of Hypothesis Testing .................................................... 109 Conclusion .....................................................................................