Natsir, Rebel Without A Pause

By Idrus F. Shahab et al.

MOHAMMAD Natsir (July 17, 1908-February 6, 1993) was a puritan. However, even the honest can be interesting. His life was not as colorful or dramatic as a stage play, but the example set by this person, who had a talent for combining words with deeds, was nothing less than remarkable. With Indonesia currently going through a kind of vicious circle—new leaders taking over, yet an efficient bureaucracy, clean politics and an effective social welfare system still beyond the people’s reach— Natsir emerges as a leader who escaped that cycle. He was clean, consistent and although sharp toned when defending his position, he was a humble man.

In the book, The Life and Struggles of Natsir: 70 Years of Memories, George McTurnan Kahin, an American scholar on Indonesia who sympathized with the Indonesian struggle for independence at that time, recalled the impression Natsir made on their first meeting. As Minister of Information, he spoke openly about what was going on in Indonesia. However, what really stuck in Kahin’s mind was the Minister’s appearance. “He was wearing a patched-up shirt, something I have never seen among government officials anywhere,” said Kahin.

Perhaps that is why to this day—during the centennial of his birth and 15 years after his death—many believe that Mohammad Natsir is part of our contemporary life. Many like to identify themselves with Natsir. Islamic hardliners, for instance, tend to forget how close his ideas were with Western democracy, while pointing out his distress at the zeal of Christian missionaries in Indonesia. Moderate Muslims seem to have the same selective political memory. Many have forgotten the period when this former Prime Minister, who represented the Masyumi Party, led the Islamic Propagation Council (Dewan Dakwah). Meanwhile, others may recall the period when differences of opinion could not divide the country. Pluralism, at that time, was commonplace.

Mohammad Natsir lived at a time when friendship across ideological lines was not ground for suspicion, nor was it a betrayal. He was fundamentally against communism. In fact, his later involvement in the Revolutionary Government of the Republic of Indonesia (PRRI) was caused by, among other factors, his disapproval of the Sukarno administration, which he felt was getting closer to the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI). Masyumi and the PKI were two groups which could never meet. Natsir knew, however, that political identity was not absolute. He often shared a cup of coffee with D.N. Aidit at the parliament’s canteen, even though Aidit was then head of the PKI’s Central Committee.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Tempo Publishing
• Release date: Aug 19, 2013
• ISBN: 9781301334056

Book preview

N A T S I R

Rebel Without A Pause

By Idrus F. Shahab [et. al]

Editors: Amarzan Loebis [et.al]

Published by Tempo Publishing at Smashwords

Copyrights Tempo 2013

ISBN: 9781301334056

Illustration on Cover: Kendra Paramita

An Undramatic Struggle

THE life of Mohammad Natsir was somewhat lackluster. Unlike a Hollywood drama, it lacked struggle, adventure, love, betrayal and a surprise ending. Yet Natsir was remarkable for his decency, his steadiness and, despite his tolerance, for his firm belief in his own principles. A rare model of goodness.

Introduction

MOHAMMAD Natsir (July 17, 1908-February 6, 1993) was a puritan. However, even the honest can be interesting. His life was not as colorful or dramatic as a stage play, but the example set by this person, who had a talent for combining words with deeds, was nothing less than remarkable. With Indonesia currently going through a kind of vicious circle—new leaders taking over, yet an efficient bureaucracy, clean politics and an effective social welfare system still beyond the people’s reach— Natsir emerges as a leader who escaped that cycle. He was clean, consistent and although sharp toned when defending his position, he was a humble man.

In the book, The Life and Struggles of Natsir: 70 Years of Memories, George McTurnan Kahin, an American scholar on Indonesia who sympathized with the Indonesian struggle for independence at that time, recalled the impression Natsir made on their first meeting. As Minister of Information, he spoke openly about what was going on in Indonesia. However, what really stuck in Kahin’s mind was the Minister’s appearance. He was wearing a patched-up shirt, something I have never seen among government officials anywhere, said Kahin.

Perhaps that is why to this day—during the centennial of his birth and 15 years after his death—many believe that Mohammad Natsir is part of our contemporary life. Many like to identify themselves with Natsir. Islamic hardliners, for instance, tend to forget how close his ideas were with Western democracy, while pointing out his distress at the zeal of Christian missionaries in Indonesia. Moderate Muslims seem to have the same selective political memory. Many have forgotten the period when this former Prime Minister, who represented the Masyumi Party, led the Islamic Propagation Council (Dewan Dakwah). Meanwhile, others may recall the period when differences of opinion could not divide the country. Pluralism, at that time, was commonplace.

Mohammad Natsir lived at a time when friendship across ideological lines was not ground for suspicion, nor was it a betrayal. He was fundamentally against communism. In fact, his later involvement in the Revolutionary Government of the Republic of Indonesia (PRRI) was caused by, among other factors, his disapproval of the Sukarno administration, which he felt was getting closer to the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI). Masyumi and the PKI were two groups which could never meet. Natsir knew, however, that political identity was not absolute. He often shared a cup of coffee with D.N. Aidit at the parliament’s canteen, even though Aidit was then head of the PKI’s Central Committee.

It was also differences of opinion which brought together Bung Karno (Sukarno) and Mohammad Natsir, and which led to other, more significant meetings between them. At the end of the 1930s, Sukarno, who was championing nationalism-secularism and Natsir, who was pushing Islam as the basis for the state, were involved in a lengthy polemic through the Pembela Islam (Defenders of Islam) magazine. The polemic did not end in any agreement, but they ended having the greatest admiration for each other.

Over a decade later, the two leaders were reunited under totally different circumstances. Natsir was Prime Minister and Sukarno was President of a country beset by squabbling political parties. The Sukarno-Natsir relationship was at its closest when Natsir, as head of the Masyumi faction, offered a solution for a country divided over the concept of federal government. The action, which was later popularly known as the Integral Motion, was to return the nation back to a unitary state. It proved to be effective in upsetting the divisive politics of The Netherlands.

Ultimately, Mohammad Natsir, an articulate and refined politician, was unable to avoid being involved in a conflict which clearly determined who the winner and the loser Mohammad was. Natsir joined the PRRI/ Natsir, an PRS movement because of his articulate extreme disappointment with Bung Karno, who had got too close with the PKI and who had become an increasingly authoritarian national leader. Natsir was arrested and imprisoned along with other dissenters, without trial.

His world changed totally when Sukarno, who had ruled for six turbulent years with his guided democracy, was finally overthrown by Suharto. Champions of democracy were intrigued, pinning their hopes on this taciturn army general. Suharto did release Sukarno’s political prisoners, including Natsir and his political colleagues. However, Suharto failed to sustain his popularity for long among this group of early supporters. In 1980, he began to show his true colors as an authoritarian leader.

The consistent Natsir did not change. He stuck to his principles the way he did during his days under Sukarno. He opposed the actions of the Presidential Palace by signing the Petition of 50. As a consequence, he was branded one of the primary opponents of the Suharto administration. Signatories of the petition began