(2) the restoration of the primacy of ulama leadership by reconfirming the supremacy of the Syuriah over the Tanfidziah in the statutes and by-laws; (3) the withdrawal of NU from 'practical politics' by prohibiting NU officials from simultaneously holding official positions in a political party; and (4) the election of the new leadership with a new package of programs which placed heavy emphasis on non-political fields. The election of a new leadership was significant. The method adopted to achieve this was somewhat unusual but nevertheless effective. Upon the written proposal of Idham Chalid, the congress decided by acclamation that the election of formateurs should be completely entrusted to As'ad Syamsul Arifin. As'ad then chose six others to form a commission of 'those who bind and solve' (ahlul halli wal aqdi). The seven-member commission conferred and drew up a new leadership list for NU. As expected, Achmad Siddiq and Abdurrahman Wahid were appointed to head the Syuriah and Tanfidziah respectively. The other appointments, however, came as a surprise to many, including Abdurrahman himself. The Cipete group was almost completely eliminated and even the proteges of As'ad were ignored. This new team represented something of an overkill against the Idham faction and was to cause new conflict after the congress. A further problem was the appointment of senior ulama as mustasyar (advisers). Their dominance served ultimately to suffocate the internal democracy of the organisation. NU's Place and Role in the Development of Indonesia: Abdurrahman Wahid's Vision There were high expectations of the new NU leadership. Abdurrahman, in particular, attracted close attention because as general chairman he was responsible for implementing the organisation's new programme of social and economic activities. Some insight into how Abdurrahman saw NU contributing to national development can be gained from his 'Establishing Beachheads' article of 1980. One of the points which he emphasised was the need for long- term planning and sustained effort if development objectives were to be achieved. In the short term, he advocated a 'strategic approach' rather than a revolutionary one. This required setting- up 'beachheads' from which the development process within the broader community could be launched. He viewed the pesantren network as one possible beachhead. The important thing, he argued, was for these beachheads to develop their own human resources at the same time as stimulating development efforts in the surrounding community. In this way, both the spiritual and material well-being of the entire population could be enhanced. Development should be a process of people's transformation, he said, and not just a matter of building up facilities and physical infrastructure. Projects for socio-economic transformation initiated by external organisations were fine but what was really needed was for the people themselves to do the work, the start of a process of 'inner change'.7 Another theme which Abdurrahman pursued was that of Islam and the development of tolerant attitudes. A tradition of tolerance in Islam was clearly established, he said, by the actions of Muhammad, by teachings contained in the Qur'an, and by the hadith (traditions of the Prophet Muhammad). Islam was tolerant in nature because that was the order of God. Although part of Islamic tradition, many Muslims as well as non-Muslims chose not to understand this. He stated that the rights of minorities must be recognised and a firm stand taken against discrimination or intimidation on the basis of religion.8 Abdurrahman also urged Islamic leaders to broaden their own perspective and avoid 'overclaiming' on behalf of their faith. Making excessive demands about the role and rights of one's religion was seen as especially dangerous because it would result in exclusivism and compartmentalisation. What was needed, he argued, was for religious leaders to consider society as a whole, rather than just their own particular constituency. Religion should demand only the foundations for life; it should not advocate theocracy or a dominant role in government. He cited Iran and Malaysia as examples where this had happened. Excessive religious demands were dangerous for they cause other sections of society to organise against them.9 He further bemoaned the lack of discussion amongst ulama about social problems such as corruption, gambling and pornography, and their reluctance to develop approaches for tackling poverty, ignorance, and backwardness. He referred to the example of his father, Wahid Hasjim, and Machfoezh Siddiq, both of whom were deeply concerned about, and active in addressing, social problems. The final aspect of Abdurrahman's article which deserves mention is the section dealing with Pancasila and Indonesia's political culture. He spoke out strongly against implementing Pancasila in an absolutist manner being especially wary of demanding conformism to a particular interpretation of the national ideology. Instead he appealed for the cultivation of 'support areas' (daerah sangga) which were committed to democratic values and general community interests, and which would resist the manipulation of Pancasila by those with absolutist intentions. He offered the example of the traditional Javanese kings who claimed absolute power but whose absolutism was cushioned by a 'support area' of priyayi (aristocratic and administrative class). His conclusion is that Indonesia requires a new support area to limit the exercise of naked power.10 Conclusion The period between the 1979 and 1984 NU Congresses has seen a dramatic change in the leadership and orientation of Nahdlatul Ulama. The rise to power of Achmad Siddiq and Abdurrahman Wahid revitalised the organisation and brought a new sense of purpose to its activities. It has seen NU depart from party politics, re-affirm the primacy of ulama leadership, and renew its commitment to social and religious activities. It has also greatly improved its relations with the government. These changes have been due to NU's ability to not only draw upon the organisation's religious and historical traditions but also adapt to the challenge of change. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ References Abdurrahman Wahid 1981, 'Menetapkan pangkalan-pangkalan pendaratan menuju Indonesia yang kita cita-citakan,' in Iman Walujo and Kons Kleden (eds), Dialog: Indonesia Kini dan Esok, Keppenas, Jakarta. Achmad Siddiq 1979, Khitthah Nahdliyah, Balai Buku, Surabaya. 1983, 'Pemulihan Khittah Nahdlatul Ulama 1926' (stencil), Jember. Bruinessen, Martin van 1991, 'The 28th Congress of the Nahdlatul Ulama: Power Struggle and Social Concern,' Archipel, no. 41, pp.195-200. Nakamura, Mitsuo 1981, 'The radical traditionalism of the Nahdlatul Ulama in Indonesia: A personal account of the 26th National Congress, June 1979, Semarang', Tonan Ajia Kenkyu (Southeast Asian Studies), vol. 19, no. 2, pp.187- 204. -- 1984, 'Islam and Pancasila: The Accommodation of the Nahdlatul Ulama to the State Ideology of Indonesia', paper read at the conference of the Asian Studies Association of Australia, May 1984, Adelaide. Pengurus Besar Nahdlatul Ulama 1985, Hasil Muktamar Nahdlatul Ulama Ke-2 7 Situbondo, Sumber Barokah, Semarang. **************** 7 Abdurrahman, pp.103-5. 8 Ibid., pp.108-11. 9 Ibid., pp.117-22. 10 Ibid., pp.112-15.