U.S. Exaggerated Indonesias Terror Problem? - September 4, 2003
Times Watch for September 4, 2003
U.S. Exaggerated Indonesias Terror
Problem?
Wednesdays front-page
story by Raymond Bonner from Indonesia, Islamic Cleric Gets Mixed Verdict In
Indonesian Trial for Terrorism, paints the relatively soft sentence given to a
bin Laden-supporting cleric on trial for plotting terrorist attacks in Indonesia
as a serious setback for the Bush administration: Today's verdict will
reinforce the view of many Indonesians, including senior political leaders, that
the United States has exaggerated the terrorism problem here. The majority of
Indonesians, who are moderate Muslims, view the campaign against terrorism as a
war on Islam, and the war in Iraq has fueled those views.
In the wake of the October
bombing of a nightclub in Bali that took 200 lives, it may be more accurate to
say Indonesia continues to underestimate the problem of terrorism. It wasnt
until this August, 10 months after the Bali bombing, that
Indonesian President Megawati Sukarnoputri admitted her country harbored
terrorists.
Bonner states at the end
of his dispatch: Indonesia is the world's largest Islamic country. But it is a
secular state, and the overwhelming majority of Muslims are moderate. Political
leaders had been reluctant to criticize Mr. Bashir, fearing that it would appear
to be a broad attack on faithful Muslims.
Considering the Indonesian
governments reluctance to even acknowledge terrorists in their midst (and her
vice presidents claim that the U.S. is the terrorist king), a less
flattering explanation comes to mind: The government is trying to appease a new
strain of radical Islam in Indonesia by going easy on the cleric. Bonner himself
says: Courts here are not known for being independent, and several
Indonesians-analysts, and ordinary citizens- voiced the opinion that the
judges had acted in accordance with what the Indonesian government wanted.
Jane Perlez, reporting
from Jakarta on the same page, gives credence to the idea of increasing
radicalism among Indonesian Muslims: The moderate strand of Islam that absorbed
touches of Buddhism and Hinduism, and some mysticism, along its journey over the
centuries here, is being eroded, some fear at a rapid pace. The battle for the
soul of Islam in Indonesia is under way. Some have begun to ask whether the
Islamists who want to create a caliphate across the Muslim areas of Southeast
Asia will at the very least eventually succeed in Indonesia. Perhaps the U.S.
is more right about the threat of Indonesian terrorism than Bonner is willing to
acknowledge.
For the rest of Raymond Bonners story on the trial
of the Indonesian cleric,
click here.
For the rest of Jane Perlezs story on Indonesian
Muslims,
click here.
Architecture
Critic Cracks Up Over Twin Towers Idea
In Sundays Arts & Leisure section, Herbert
Muschamp, architecture critic for the Times, discusses a businessmans campaign
to build a Museum of Freedom at the World Trade Center site. At first he talks
in arcane fashion about the architecture of the proposed museum. But by the end
of the increasingly strange piece, Muschamp has left behind architecture for
radical politics, suggesting some saw the Twin Towers as representing both
Kafkaeque mental enslavement and Americas bizarre need for oil, and
suggests wartime America has no business talking about the lack of freedom in
other countries.
In A Dubious Idea of
Freedom, (note the dismissive quotes around the word freedom) Muschamp writes
that the museum idea exposes, more explicitly than we critics have, the degree
to which the ground zero design process has become saturated with political
ideology.
Muschamp describes the
layout of the prospective museum: The content is programmed in four educational
modules that recount, in concentric rings, mankind's struggle for emancipation
from mental and physical enslavement. Ground zero, the site of the terrorists'
assault, is the subject of the first module. As we proceed outward through the
rings, the narrative encompasses more and more territory, like an advancing
army: New York (the world's second home). America (the story of its
ever-widening circle of freedom). Last, but not least, the World (will shine a
spotlight on places that lack basic human freedoms).
Muschamp has what he
considers a better idea: Consistent with the values of historic preservation,
not to mention the theme of freedom, I propose reconstructing a project that
stood not far from ground zero for a brief time in the summer of 1984. He notes
that that previous monument consisted of a large red megaphone mounted atop a
flight of stairs and pointed toward the twin towers. Visitors were invited to
climb the stairs and, in effect, talk back to those massive symbols of state
authority and economic power.
Muschamp sees the towers
as representing a
bleak Metropolis land of zombified wage slaves: Should I have a turn at
such a mouthpiece, this is what I would say: Not everyone saw the twin towers as
symbols of freedom. For some, they represented the Kafkaesque mental enslavement
of government bureaucracy and dull office routine. For others, they stood for
Rockefeller power: for oil, that is to say, and the bizarre things we do to
satisfy our need for it.
After comparing office
routine to slavery, Muschamp suggests America has no standing to criticize lack
of freedom in other countries: Not everyone thinks that the United States is
ideally poised at this moment to point fingers at places that lack basic human
freedoms. I note, with approval, that the Freedom Museum will be linked to the
International Coalition of Historic Site Museums of Conscience. But I see scant
evidence of conscience in the brochure. Us good, others bad: where's the
conscience in that?
Muschamp realizes hes
treading on controversial ground but presses on, suggesting the museum of
freedom would lead to territorial expansion and the squelching of dissent:
Ideally, I would like to voice such opinions without being branded a traitor, a
pro-terrorist, or a person opposed to freedom. But I see no indication that your
museum will be much help in this regard.At what point does a cultural use like
your educational modules become indistinguishable from a strategy room for
territorial expansion? Will your museum encourage honest debate on issues like
this? Martial rhetoric is seldom a sure-fire sign of tolerance for dissent.
For the rest of Herbert Muschamps piece on the
World Trade Center museum,
click here.
UPDATE:
Maureen Dowd Quote Mystery Solved
On Tuesday, Times Watch questioned where columnist
Maureen Dowd got the following quote for her Sunday column: There is no order!
There is no government! We'd rather have Saddam than this!
The source of the quote
has been found: Times reporter Neil MacFarquhar, appearing on NBC Nightly News
last Friday as an eyewitness to the aftermath of the Najaf bombing that killed a
popular cleric. Over videotape of protesting Iraqis, MacFarquhar said: People
were screaming outside the mosque, There is no order. There is no government.
We'd rather have Saddam than this. MacFarquhar used the first two sentences of
that quote in his Saturday Times story on the bombing, but not the last sentence
about rather having Saddam.
