DISCRIMINATION AND RESISTANCE: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF THE AHMADIYYA SECT ISSUE IN INDONESIA Andi Muhammad Irawan A PhD Thesis submitted to the School of Arts University of New England, Australia in fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of New England July 2016 DEDICATION I dedicate this thesis to my beloved parents, wife, daughter, brothers and my sister. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My ultimate thanks are due to Allah [God], the almighty, for his uncountable blessings and guidance in my life. It would not have been possible to write this thesis without the help and support of numerous people. First of all, I would like to deliver my special thanks to my principal supervisor, Dr. Zifirdaus Adnan, who always believed in my work and provided me with intellectual support and sage advice. Secondly, my thanks also go to my co-supervisors, Prof. John S. Ryan and A/Prof. Habib Zafarullah, for their critical and valuable comments as well as their supervision. My supervisors have contributed much in terms of guidance, critiques, and suggestions, but I am fully responsible for any weaknesses, points, and conclusions made in this thesis.Thirdly, I would like to thank all the staff of the School of Arts; Prof. Alan Davidson (Head of School), Gillian Willis (School Manager), Joy Kirby, Jane Kelly, and Helena Davis for their administrative help and assistance. I also want to thank my sponsors, the Directorate General of Higher Education of the Republic of Indonesia (Dikti) and the Government of South Sulawesi for their partial financial support, Dorothy and McKay Scholarship for providing me traveling scholarship for collecting data in Indonesia, and Higher Degree Research (HDR) Services for their flexibility to let me take study suspension. I also warmly thank Bu Indrawati Zifirdaus, Pak Novi Prihananto, Pak Ahmad Dakhlan, and all the members of KIAA [Keluarga Indonesia Armidale Australia] in Armidale. Their help and kindness have made this beautiful small town like my second home. I cannot end this section without warmly and deeply thanking my wife, Hasriani, and my daughter, Adibah. They had to endure long hours without me and, during this hard time, they have shown great patience. It was not an easy iii time for us to live separately, on different continents. My special thanks also go to my parents, my brothers, and sister, whose prayers have favoured me throughout my life. They all have done their best to support me and provide me with a great life in this world. iv ABSTRACT This study investigates how the Ahmadiyya is presented discursively in various texts produced by Indonesian state official institutions, social interest groups, and two Ahmadiyya groups. The issue is examined by identifying the discourse topics created and strategies employed in the spoken and written texts of the groups and institutions mentioned above. The identification is centred upon an assumption that, on the one hand, the Ahmadiyya sect has been allegedly discriminated against through some negative discourse presentations, and that, on the other hand, the sect and its supporters may have argued against the negative presentations. The main question of this study is what is the nature of the two groups of conflicting discourses created by state official institutions, social interest groups, and the two Ahmadiyya groups when addressing the Ahmadiyya sect issue? How and why were they produced? The main question is addressed by finding answers to some subsidiary questions. To answer the questions, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) (especially the discriminatory and resistance discourse strategies) is used to examine discourse presentations of Ahmadiyya created in written texts, such as in articles, books, reports, and papers, as well as in spoken texts, such as in speeches, interviews, and personal statements found in television programs. The first part of the study focuses on how state official institutions present the Ahmadiyya sect in their legal proclamations and personal arguments. The second part discusses how social interest groups that have considerable concern about the Ahmadiyya explore the issue. The third part targets how two Ahmadiyya groups (the JAI and the GAI) present themselves while arguing against discourses that may have discredited them. The aim of the research project is to contribute to the body of knowledge about the Ahmadiyya issue in Indonesia and the field of CDA by investigating a v relatively new issue in the field, namely the religious minority issue. The research expands the possible applications of CDA approaches to the investigation of the alleged discriminatory discourse practices, and how these practices are responded to through several discourse presentations and strategies. The findings reveal that the Ahmadiyya sect, especially Jemaat Ahmadiyah Indonesia (the JAI), has been discursively discriminated against. The discursive discrimination is created by presenting the Ahmadiyya negatively as, for example, ‗the troublemaker‘, ‗blasphemer/the actor of defamation‘, ‗deviant sect‘, ‗the Hijacker of Islam‘, ‗the agent of imperialism‘, and ‗the enemy of Islam‘. These discourse topics are created using discourse strategies such as problematisation, collocation, quotation, lexicalisation, scapegoating, metaphor, social distancing, and scare tactics. In order to argue against the negative presentations, the Ahmadiyya groups and their supporters create defensive and offensive resistance discourses. The defensive discourses are ‗discourse of democracy‘, ‗discourse of unrestricted freedom of religion‘, ‗discourse of impartiality‘, ‗discourse of victims‘, ‗defenders of Islam‘, ‗public deception‘, and the ‗discourse of peace‘ and these are reated by both the JAI and the GAI. The offensive discourses are ‗discourse of public deception‘, ‗government‘s negative actions‘, and ‗problematising the government‘s authority or legitimacy‘. These discourses are created using the strategies of nominalisation, re-contextualisation, contrasting, derogated personification, victimisation, positive attribution, positive personification, power delegitimising, negative portraits of misbehaving, and the strategy of social inclusion. In conclusion, both the dominant and the Ahmadiyya groups have been involved in a serious discourse conflict. Each side is entrenched in their respective positions, and adopted strategies to maintain their positions, defend themselves, and at times, attack each other. However, this is not healthy for a peaceful co-existence and living peacefully, because it (the discourse conflict) vi could lead to further physical attacks as happened in the past. It would be beneficial for both sides and for the nation as a whole, that both sides reflect on and reconsider their positions and search for a common ground. This study could contribute as a source for the reflection and consideration. vii LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1. Fatwas addressing Ahmadiyya in Indonesia (Crouch, 2009) ………. 81 Table 3.2. Indonesia Governments‘ Regulations addressing Ahmadiyya Issue in regional and local levels (Crouch, 2009) ………………………………………... 82 Table 4.1. The Interview Participants …………………………………………... 97 Table 6.1. The Number of Violent Acts against Ahmadiyya in some Provinces in Indonesia, starting from 2007 to 2012 (as documented by Setara Institute)…….. 185 viii LIST OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS BAKORPAKEM : Badan Koordinasi Pengawas Aliran Kepercayaan Masyarakat [The Coordinating Body to Monitor the Development of Religious or Belief Streams in Society]. This body is given authority by government to monitor religious sect. Its members come from several official institutions, such as from the Ministry of Religious Affairs and Attorney General‘s Office. BC : British Columbia BPR : Business Processing Reengineering BPUPKI : Badan Penyelidik Usaha Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia [Investigating Committee for the Preparation of Indonesian Independence]. CDA : Critical Discourse Analysis CF : Consent Form DDII : Dewan Dakwah Islamiyah Indonesia [Indonesian Council for Islamic Propagation] DI/TII : Darul Islam/Tentara Islam Indonesia [The Territory of Islam/Indonesian Islamic Army]. This was a movement attempted by some Indonesia Muslim guerilla fighters to establish an Indonesian Islamic state during 1950s and early 1960s. DIRJEN BIMAS : Direkorat Jenderal Bina Masyarakat [the Directorate General of Public Guidance] FKUB : Forum Kerukunan Umat beragama [Religious Harmony Forum] FPI : Front Pembela Islam [Islamic Defender Front]. This is a social and Islamic organisation that disseminates messages for the banning and dissolution of Ahmadiyya. It was established on 17 August 1998. ix FUI : Forum Umat Islam [Islamic People Forum], a conservative Muslim organisation. G/30/S/PKI : Gerakan 30 September Partai Komunis Indonesia [the Coup Movement on the Thirtieth of September said to have been ‗initiated‘ by the Indonesian Communist party, the PKI]. GAI : Gerakan Ahmadiyah Indonesia [Indonesian Ahmadiyya Movement]. This Ahmadiyya group was established in Indonesia in 1928. Its followers claim Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (the founder of Ahmadiyya) as the messiah, Imam Mahdi, and a reformer (mujaddid) of Islam. However, they do not claim Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet. Gerindo : Gerakan Rakyat Indonesia [the Indonesian People‘s Movement] HAM : Hak Azasi Manusia (Human Rights) HT : Hizbut Tahrir, an Islamic movement aspiring to establish an Islamic state mainly through education. ICCPR : International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights IMF