Chapter Four NU's Leadership Crisis and Search for Identity in the Early 1980s: From the 1979 Semarang Congress to the 1984 Situbondo Congress.1 Mitsuo Nakamura The purpose of this paper is to discuss the significance of various changes which occurred in Nahdlatul Ulama's national leadership between 1979 and 1984, i.e., from the 26th National Congress (muktamar) in Semarang to the 27th Congress in Situbondo.2 There were two major issues dominating NU during this period: the first was often referred to as the 're- establishment of the 1926 guidelines' (pemulihan khittah NU 1926); the other was the acceptance of Pancasila (the national ideology) as the 'sole foundation' (asas tunggal) of the association. The acknowledgment of Pancasila as asas tunggal was made obligatory by the government for all political and social organisations. These issues precipitated a series of dramatic events within NU, not the least of which was the ousting of idham Chalid, who had personified NU over the previous two decades. The Situbondo Congress formalised the rise of the Achmad Siddiq-Abdurrahman Wahid leadership and also decided that NU would break from its past involvement in so-called, 'practical politics' tie. its existence as an independent political party between 1952 and 1973 and as a major element within the Islamic party, PPP, since 1973). The decision to move in this direction had in fact already been made at the Semarang Congress but was discussed in greater depth, and reconfirmed, at the Situbondo Congress. The Congress reasserted that NU's raison d'etre was to function as a religious organisation, or 'jamiah diniyyah', under the leadership of ulama. The subsequent performance of the Siddiq-Abdurrahman leadership at the Situbondo Congress to the latest Krapyak Congress of 1989 is, however, a separate topic and we will limit our discussion here to an examination of NU during the first half of the 1980s (i.e., the period leading up to the Situbondo Congress).3 This paper is in three sections. Firstly, we shall look at the leadership crisis in mid-1982 leading to the fall of Idham Chalid. Secondly, the acceptance of Pancasila as asas tunggal and the formation of the Siddiq-Abdurrahman leadership team in late 1983-1984 will be examined. Finally, we will consider NU's contribution to Indonesia's development and the reform program of Abdurrahman Wahid. In order to better understand the nature and significance of the transformation that took place in NU we will examine several important documents that appeared during this period. There are two documents in particular which warrant careful examination, both written by Achmad Siddiq, who was elected to the position of rais am (general president) of the Syuriah (NU's National Religious Council) in the Situbondo Congress. The first is a booklet entitled Khitthah Nahdliyah (The Basic Guidelines for NU's Struggle) published a few months before the Semarang Congress.4 The second is a policy paper entitled 'Pemulihan Khitthah Nahdlatul Ulama 1926' (The Re-establishment of the Nahdlatul Ulama Charter of 1926), which he submitted to the National Conference of NU Religious Scholars (Musyawarah Nasional Alim Ulama NU) or Munas held in Situbondo in December 1983 tie. one year before the muktamar was held at the same place).5 Understanding the thrust of these two documents is extremely important if we are to appreciate what happened during this period. They focus on the seminal ideas of the reform movement led by Achmad Siddiq and Abdurrahman Wahid. In this context another important source is a long interview-based article by Abdurrahman entitled 'Establishing Beachheads in the Push Towards the Indonesia of Our Dreams' (Menetapkan Pangkalan-pangkalan Pendaratan Menuju Indonesia Yang Kita Cita-citakan').6 Whilst this article does not specifically dwell on the place and role of NU in the 'Indonesia of Our Dreams', it is nonetheless very enlightening in the way in which it provides a clear insight into Abdurrahman's thought at the beginning of the 1980s. In his opinion, what was needed urgently were efforts to create a'sense of being a nation' and to overcome the most fundamental problems (masalah-masalah yang paling dasar) of poverty, ignorance, and backwardness. Leadership Crisis: Fall of Idham Chalid (May 1982) The intensity of criticism against Idham Chalid's leadership in the Semarang Congress was a clear indication that a critical situation was developing in NU. Nevertheless, he was re-elected to the position of the general chairman of the Tanfidziah (Executive Board) in 1979, after admitting to, and apologising for, his errors and promising to improve his performance. Idham's authority was seemingly re-established at this congress, but before long it was again called into question. The death of KH Bisri Syansuri, NU's rais am, in April 1980 precipitated the disintegration of the top leadership of NU. Kiai Bisri was one of NU's most senior ulama and had participated directly in the foundation of NU in 1926. His strong credentials as an expert in fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) were crucial in providing religious sanction to the behaviour of NU. His role was decisive in forcing modifications to the Marriage Law bill in the parliament in 1973 and the PPP's walkout on the issue of kebatinan (mystical sects) in 1978. He was an important religious figure within the PPP as well. His death effectively weakened NU's strength in the PPP resulting in a series of conflicts between NU and the modernist Muslimin Indonesia (MI) faction led by John Naro. The issue of NU's share of seats in the parliament was particularly bitter, with Naro relegating many of NU's most effective politicians to unwinnable positions on the candidate list for the 1982 general elections. His handling of this matter brought strong protests from some of NU's senior leaders but Idham himself did nothing to defend his organisation's position. On 2 May 1982 Idham Chalid was visited in Jakarta by four senior ulama who urged him to step down for 'health reasons'. Those four ulama were KH As'ad Syamsul Arifin of Situbondo, KH Ali Ma'shum of Krapyak, KH Machrus Aly of Lirboyo, and KH Masykur of Jakarta. Individually, they commanded considerable authority within NU; collectively they could claim to speak for the majority of the organisation's ulama. They conveyed a clear message to Idham that his chairmanship of NU was no longer desirable or tolerable. This left Idham with little choice but to sign a statement resigning from the position of general chairman and handing interim authority over to Ali Ma'shum, who had succeeded Kiai Bisri as rais am. In order not to disturb the national general elections on 4 May, it was agreed that Idham's statement would not be made public until 6 May. Nevertheless the news soon started to circulate and quickly caused uproar both within NU and broader political circles. Idham's supporters called the event a'coup by ulama'. A substantial number of the members of NU's two central boards (i.e., the Tanfidziah and Syuriah) and the provincial leadership groups disapproved of the manner in which Idham had been asked to step down and demanded that he be reinstated. Idham himself surprised the public by issuing a statement on 14 May cancelling his earlier resignation. NU was split between those who supported Idham and those who desired new leadership. Pro- Idham forces claimed that the authority of NU's central leadership and the formal functioning of the organisation were in jeopardy. Out of this tumult, two opposing groups emerged. One, headed by the four senior ulama who had sought Idham's resignation, was labelled by the media as the 'Situbondo group', after the region in which Kiai As'ad's pesantren was located. The other group was staunchly supportive of Idham, and comprised mostly NU politicians and bureaucrats at the Jakarta level. It was called the 'Cipete group' (after the suburb in Jakarta where Idham lived). Statements and counter-statements flew as the two groups skirmished and manoeuvred to recruit supporters. The 2 May incident was unprecedented in NU's history. The fact that an NU general chairman who was elected by the congress, could be asked to step down by a small group of senior ulama gave rise to speculation about elitism within NU. The incident was not, however, unreasonable given the organisational structure of NU. The Syuriah is invested with paramount authority. The Tanfidziah, regardless of the popularity or seniority of its members within the organisation, was ultimately subordinate to the Syuriah. An effective reversal of this order over the preceding two decades had seen the general chairman and the Tanfidziah act as if they held ultimate power in Nahdlatul Ulama. For many ulama this was a highly regrettable deviation from the ideals and founding principles of NU. In fact, the senior ulama in NU saw this as a serious threat to the organisation's existence. Acceptance of Pancasila as asas tunggal and the formation of the Siddiq-Abdurrahman leadership team In time it became obvious that the Situbondo group had a decisive upper hand over the Cipete group. The Situbondo group in effect represented the Syuriah. It was this body which appointed Abdurrahman Wahid as the chairman of the preparatory committee for the 1983 Munas. A munas is organised by the Syuriah and attended by distinguished ulama, most of whom are the heads of pesantren. It is a forum for deliberation (musyawarah) amongst ulama and is empowered to make recommendations to the muktamar. A munas has no authority to change the constitution and statutes of NU, the decisions of the muktamar, or the composition of the national leadership. It does however, have considerable moral authority, and given the controversy within NU since 1982, the decisions of the 1983 munas could not be easily ignored. By appointing Abdurrahman as munas committee chairman, the Situbondo group was setting in motion a train of events that would result in an overhaul of the NU leadership. The 1983 Munas Alim Ulama NU was convened at Pesantren Salafiyah Syafi'iyah, Asembagus, Situbondo, East Java (a pesantren under the tutelage of KH As'ad Syamsul Arifin) from 18-21 December. The so-called, 'Munas Situbondo' made a series of significant decisions, clearly setting a new direction for NU. Among those decisions, the three most important were the 'Restoration of the fundamental guidelines of NU 1926' (Pemulihan khittah Nahdlatul Ulama 1926), the 'Declaration on the relationship between Pancasila and Islam' (Deklarasi tentang hubungan Pancasila dengan Islam), and the 'Recommendation on the prohibition of NU officials simultaneously acting as officials of political organisations' (Rekomendasi larangan perangkapan jabatan pengurus NU dengan jabatan pengurus organisasi politik). These decisions not only reconfirmed the supremacy of the ulama within the organisation, they also cleared the way for the acceptance of Pancasila as the organisation's sole foundation. These two aspects were .inseparably intertwined and encapsulate the transformation of NU that began at this munas. As mentioned at the beginning of this paper, some of the most important discussion material circulated among ulama and NU cadres during this period was written by Achmad Siddiq. His Khitthah Nahdliyah and 'Pemulihan Khitthah Nahdlatul Ulama 1926' became official discussion papers at the 1983 munas and were extensively quoted in the final decisions. The following is a paraphrased and abridged translation of Siddiq's 'Pemulihan' paper distributed among the munas participants. There are three main tonics which deserve attention. The first of these concerns the position of ulama. Here Siddiq argues that NU was established as a religious association (jam'iyah diniyah) representing those who share the orthodox Sunni tradition where decisions are made on the basis of one of the four mazhab (schools) of Islamic jurisprudence, ie. the Syafi'i, Hambali, Hanafi, and Maliki. The ulama are the pillars of the umat (the community of the faithful) and the well-being of the umat is dependent on the leadership of ulama. As its name suggests NU is an organisation of ulama who have arisen (bangkit) to the challenges of the hour and whose task it is to awaken (membangkitkan) their disciples (santri) and fellow Muslims around them. The leadership role of ulama is not limited to pesantren where they assume the position of guides and mentors to the santri but ought to be much broader, influencing the surrounding Muslim communities. Consequently, nobody within NU should ignore or challenge the leadership of ulama. Siddiq's paper did not ignore contemporary developments either. It commented on NU's current crisis that: So long as the leadership position of the ulama is stable, NU will continue to go along smoothly. However, in recent years, there has been some regression of the ulama's position in NU. Some of the Tanfidziah members who are technocrats and entrusted by the ulama to cany out the day- to-day tasks of running the organisation have challenged the leadership role of the ulama. This is the cause of the recent shaking of the foundations of NU. Awareness of the danger coming from this has been growing in NU for some time, and decisions intended to restore the position and function of the ulama in order to secure the future of NU have been made time and time again. However, there has been no recognition of the authority of these decisions at all up till now. Instead various obstacles and hindrances have been set by way of numerous excuses and all manner of tactics. Deliberation must now occur to ensure that they are removed. It is proper and fitting that the ulama who have gathered together for this musyawarah formulate concrete steps to ensure that these obstacles and hindrances are once and for all overcome. The second topic was that of organisational reform. Regarding this, Siddiq wrote: It is necessary to develop the following formula to secure the authority of the Syuriah as the manager of NU: those in charge of NU (pengurus) at all levels are the members d Syuriah; only Syuriah leaders are to be elected through conferences; the functionaries (pengurus pelaksana ie. the members of the Tanfidziah) are to be appointed and dismissed by the Syuriah after considering the result of musyawarah; and it is necessary to make the qualifications for the Syuriah candidates more strict. His third point concerned NU principles of activity. NU's actions are based upon religious convictions and Islamic law (Syari'ah), and the decisions of NU that have been approved by the Syuriah as lawful (sah). The Syuriah Board is authorised collectively to deny permission or stop any plans for activities if they are against the teachings or interests of Islam or against the by-laws of NU. NU was established to pursue the common good (ishlaah). This is in accordance with the goal of national development, ie. the holistic development of Indonesian people (pembangunan manusia Indonesia seutuhnya). Because of that, NU participates in nation building actively and positively, not because of its responsibility to meet the national obligations alone but also to meet its own religious obligations and to realise its own ideals. This last point, i.e., participation in national development efforts, represented a stepping stone for the next point of the argument, namely that the acceptance of the Pancasila as the asas tunggal of NU is not a matter of political tactics, but rather is based upon NU's founding principles. The leaders of Indonesia's umat, it was argued, had participated actively in the formulation of the Pancasila, and its noble values are congruent with and supported by Islamic principles. Pancasila and Islam can go together side-by-side and can complement each other (saling menunjang). The two are not in contradiction and should not be put into contradiction. There is no need to choose one of the two and throw away the other. NU accepts Pancasila as it is set out in the 1945 Constitution and rejects the interpretation of Pancasila which deviates from it and rejects the view that it is of the same level as a religion. Islam is a revealed religion while Pancasila is the result of human thinking. The Government has always emphasised that it has no intention of making Pancasila into a religion or creating a Pancasila-like religion. NU takes the claims of the Government seriously. NU is convinced that the government is not inviting NU to accept Pancasila in order to reduce the standing of Islam. NU accepts Pancasila not because of political considerations but rather because of considerations of Islamic law. To illustrate this point Siddiq refers to NU's historical experience. At the 1936 Congress held in Banjarmasin, NU adopted a resolution that Indonesia was to be regarded as 'Darul Islam' (literally, 'the abode, or domain, of Islam'). This is a technical term in Islamic jurisprudence referring to a territory that has a majority population of Muslim citizens. Darul Islam in this context (it is used elsewhere in a strongly political way) does not have any implication of an 'Islamic state', but rather refers to 'Islamic territory'. One of the immediate consequences of adopting this term of reference is that an unidentified corpse would automatically be assumed to be Muslim, unless investigations prove otherwise, and as such would be accorded an Islamic burial. More importantly though, it means that the entire Muslim population is religiously obligated to maintain order and social harmony and to prevent crime. In other words, it signified a recognition by the Muslim community that Indonesia is their home and that they cannot consider the interests of the nation to be otherwise than their own interests. Moreover, this understanding holds regardless of whether or not the national government is constitutionally an Islamic government or a secular government. Siddiq then mentions the resolution taken by NU's ulama in anticipation of a serious battle in Surabaya in October 1945. Muslims were obligated individually (fardlu 'ain) to engage in the physical struggle to defend Indonesia from the returning Dutch colonialists. This is the famous 'Jihad Resolution' (Resolusi Jihad) that helped heighten Indonesian resistance to the re- establishment of Dutch authority. Another case indicating NU's attitude to the government was the according of the title of waliyul amri dlaruri bissyaukah ('effective holder of interim power') to President Sukarno in 1954 in the midst of the Darul Islam rebellion. The title meant that the Republic of Indonesia was a lawful state (negara yang sah) according to Islamic law, and that the head of state was entitled to appoint wall hakim (legal delegates) to act on his behalf. A common example was when a wall hakim officiated for an absent father of the bride at a marriage ceremony. This, in effect, gave to civil law a religious sanction, in as much as the head of state and his various officers and representatives were recognised by Sunni jurisprudence as ruling with God-given authority, even though they did not constitute an Islamic government. The jenazah (dead body) case and the wall hakim (legal representative) case are both directly concerned with the administration of personal law for Muslims, yet their implications go well beyond this. In fact, they serve to legitimate the Republic of Indonesia in terms of Islamic law. These cases represent excellent examples of how NU jurists (fuqaha) approach broader legal issues. The Situbondo Munas also signalled the emergence of the Siddiq-Abdurrahman leadership. Solidly supported by the most senior ulama within NU--As'ad Syamsul Arifin, Machrus All, Ali Ma'shum, and Masjkur--the eloquent Achmad Siddiq was instrumental in persuading the munas participants to adopt formally the abovementioned decisions. Abdurrahman Wahid, as the chairman of the preparatory committee, was very active in engaging, through a series of careful consultations, senior government officials to formulate a mutually agreeable framework for cooperation. Through this process he developed a close working relationship with Benny Moerdani, then Commander of Kopkamtib (Komando Pemulihan Keamanan dan Ketertiban--the Command for the Restoration of Security and Public Order), the powerful military security apparatus. Abdurrahman also played a critical role in directing discussions at the munas sessions towards the acceptance of the resolutions formulated by Siddiq. Through this munas, the distinctive role of the Siddiq-Abdurrahman team was widely recognised and the ground laid for the formalisation of their leadership positions at the 1984 NU congress. Achmad Siddiq belonged to the second generation of the founders of NU. His father, M. Siddiq who established Pesantren As-Siddiqiyah, Jember, in 1915 was among the founders of NU. Together with his elder brother, Machfoezh Siddiq, Achmad continued to lead his father's pesantren. After heading the NU youth organisation Ansor, he became Secretary to the Minister of Religious Affairs, Wahid Hasyim, from 1949 to 1952. He was elected to the parliament in the 1955 general elections but withdrew shortly afterwards to concentrate on pesantren education. He was a member of the Syuriah when he wrote the influential Khitthah Nahdliyah booklet in the late 1970s and assumed the role of formulator of NU's identity. His election to the position of rais am in the 1984 Situbondo congress at the comparatively young age of 63 (together with the elevation of the thirty-nine year old Abdurrahman Wahid to the general chairmanship) marked a significant regeneration of the top leadership of NU. His eloquence and authoritative air contributed greatly to accelerating the process of change within NU. The success of the Situbondo Munas paved the way for the success of 1984 NU Congress. Meanwhile, reconciliation was achieved with the Cipete group through the mediation of the Mrs Wahid Hasyim tie. widow of Wahid Hasyim). Preparation for the Congress was again entrusted to Abdurrahman Wahid. The timing of the Congress was very significant in that it was set to conclude just before the passage of the Social Organisations Law bill in the Parliament. Instead of engaging in lobbying for its modification, a course of action vigorously pursued by Muhammadiyah, NU was to tackle the problem of asas tunggal and Pancasila more positively and on its own terms. The choice of pesantren Situbondo as a venue for the congress was also very significant. Marking a clear departure from the pattern set by the two previous congresses which had been held in the large cities of Surabaya in 1971 and Semarang in 1979. Situbondo was located in the remote countryside of East Java, an unlikely location for a national congress but typical pesantren country. The choice was felt to be appropriate, for not only did it serve to pay homage to the elderly As'ad Syamsul Arifin, but it also expressed, in more general terms, that the theme of the congress was the 're-establishment of ulama leadership' within NU. When the time for the congress arrived it seemed as if the entire national membership of NU had gathered in Situbondo, moving one newspaper to begin the front page news item under the headline: 'Endless Waves of People'. Endless too were the waves of senior government figures and high-ranking officials, civil as well as military, that descended upon the small city. Foremost amongst them was President Soeharto. This procession of officials left no doubt as to the level of government concern over the outcome of the congress. The congress convened from the 8-12 December 1984. Of the many resolutions passed the following were the most important: (1) the acceptance of Pancasila as the asas tunggal, or sole foundation, of NU; *********** 1 This is a revised version of a paper presented at the 'Contemporary Trends in Indonesian Islam' conference, Centre of Southeast Asian Studies, Monash University, 14-15 September 1991. I would like to thank Greg Fealy and Greg Barton for their considerable assistance in editing this article. 2 For my account of the 1979 Congress, see 'The Radical Traditionalism of the Nahdlatul Ulama in Indonesia: A Personal Account of the 26th National Congress', Southeast Asian Studies, vol. 19, no. 2, pp.187- 204. [Republished in chapter three of this book.] 3 The 1989 NU Congress at Krapyak has already been well examined by Martin van Bruinessen. See, 'The 2801 Congress of the Nahdlatul Ulama: Power Struggle and Social Concerns', Archipe[, no. 41, 1991. [Republished in chapter seven of this book.] 4 Achmad Siddiq, Khitthah Nahdliyah Balai Buku, Surabaya, 1979. 5 Achmad Siddiq, Pemulihan Khitthah Nahdlarul Ulama 1926, stencil, Jember, 1983. 6 Abdurrahrnan Wahid,'Menetapkan Pangkalan-Pangkalan Pendaratan Menuju Indonesia yang Kita Cita-Citakan', in Imam Walujo and Kons Kleden (interviewers and eds), Dialog: Indonesia Kini dan Esok (Dialogue: Indonesia in the Present and Future), Leppenas, Jakarta, 1980, pp.103-28.