•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   

The following is adapted from the president’s speech, “Toward Harmony Among Civilizations,” delivered at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University on Sept. 29.

Several months ago, President Barack Obama made a historic speech in Cairo seeking to redefine relations between America and the Muslim world. I would like to respond to that speech.

President Obama delivered his speech at Cairo University, one of the oldest and best universities in the Islamic world. I speak today at Harvard, the oldest and most prestigious university in America. But our objective is the same: to take a hard look at relations between the West and the Islamic world, and to chart a new course forward.

It is fitting that I am here after the G-20 summit in Pittsburgh. The G-20 is one manifestation of the change taking place in global politics. The G-20 grouping, comprising some 85 percent of the world’s GNP and 80 percent of world trade, is not just an economic powerhouse — it is also a civilizational powerhouse.

The G-20 for the first time accommodates all major civilizations — not just Western countries, but also China, South Korea, India, South Africa and others, including, significantly, three countries with large Muslim populations: Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Indonesia.

We are very pleased that the G-20 has been institutionalized, and looks set to be the premier forum for international economic cooperation. The world’s civilizations should be properly represented in one forum.

Post-Independence Reality and Change

Civilizations. They at once define us, and divide us. Is harmony truly out of reach?

Sixteen years ago, the late Samuel Huntington published an essay proposing that after the cold war, civilizations, religions and cultures would become the defining feature of international relations and would constitute the primary cause of conflicts between and within nations.

To me, the term “clash of civilizations” itself is counterproductive. I don’t believe that civilizations are inherently incompatible and prone to conflict when they interact. But Huntington’s warning of post-cold-war fault lines and potential turbulence is not a trivial reminder. Civilizational issues are rife in modern politics. Indeed, Huntington’s warning also has been relevant to Indonesia.

In the roller-coaster years following independence, Indonesia suffered separatist threats, ethnic and religious conflicts, and Islamic insurgencies.

But we overcame these challenges. We adapted. And instead of failing, we thrived.

Today we are by and large an archipelago of peace. We have fortified our national identity through three successful, peaceful national elections. We are becoming a model of democracy and decentralization. We are forging ahead with sweeping reforms of our financial and industrial structure; Indonesia is a dynamic emerging economy, enjoying one of the highest growth rates in Asia after China and India.

Thus, no matter how deep and seemingly divisive the civilizational forces facing Indonesia — ethnic differences and religious conflicts — we overcame them.

Please do not misunderstand me. I am a w are of the painful realities of our world. I am aware of the thousands of years of painful relations between Judaism, Islam and Christianity. When dealing with matters of faith, we face basic human emotions that are complicated and stubborn and are likely to intensify. According to some estimates, Islam will be the world’s largest religion by 2025, accounting for some 30 percent of the world population. As religiosity increases, so will the politics of identity. And aided by globalization and technology, extremism and radicalism can only grow.

In addition, mutual exposure between civilizations will become the most intense humanity has ever seen. Democracy also has gained ground, spreading in the Islamic world. There were only a handful of democracies at the turn of the 20th century. Today there are some 89 full democracies. Even the Organization of Islamic Conference has adopted the historic Mecca Charter committing its members to the principles of democracy, human rights and governance.

I believe we can fundamentally change and evolve the way civilizations, religions and cultures interact. This is not utopia. It is a pragmatic vision. I have seen it work. The question is: Can we make it work globally?

Nine Pragmatic Imperatives

Let me outline nine imperatives to achieve harmony among civilizations. Why nine? Well, nine is my lucky number.

The first imperative is to make the 21st century the century of soft power.

In the 20th century we saw hard power in the form of warfare and a long cold war that risked nuclear holocaust. One estimate suggests that some 180 million people died in the wars of the last century.

But there exists a large “soft power deficit” that the world’s civilizations must fill. In the 13th century, Islamic civilization was the most sophisticated in the world because it had an enormous thirst for knowledge. And this body of scientific knowledge from the Muslim world was later utilized by the Western Renaissance. Civilizations have built on each other’s knowledge and become enriched by them.

We have done the same in Indonesia, where we have built on our exposure to Eastern, Islamic and Western influences, culminating in our open, pluralistic and tolerant society. Experience has taught me that soft power is also an effective weapon against conflict. Just ask the people of Aceh.

For 30 years, Aceh was rife with violence. Successive Indonesian governments opted for a rigid military solution, because a settlement seemed so elusive. I pursued a new approach defined by goodwill and trust building. I offered the separatists peace with dignity. Remarkably, we reached a settlement in just five short rounds of negotiations. The peace agreement was fully in line with my objective to defend our sovereignty and territorial integrity but in a civilized and democratic way.

The second imperative is to intensify global dialogue and outreach.

We have seen many good initiatives. In 2001, the United Nations began the Dialogue among Civilizations. Spain and Turkey later launched the Alliance of Civilizations. The Asia Europe Meeting also took up interfaith dialogue. Recently, Saudi Arabia convened the Interfaith Conference at the UN. Indonesia and Norway in 2006 launched the Global Inter-Media Dialogue in the aftermath of the cartoon crisis.

We must deepen the quality of these dialogues so that they produce specific actions and go beyond discussions among like-minded moderates. A true dialogue must address age-old grievances and confront false stereotypes. Indeed, the best dialogues are respectful and honest, open-ended and constructive, intense and solution-oriented. These were the quality of dialogues held in Indonesia between Muslims and Christians in conflict zones in Poso and Maluku, which culminated in a commitment to peaceful reconciliation.

Islam and the West

The third imperative is the need to find a solution to political conflicts that drive a wedge between the Western and Muslim worlds.

Today, some two out of three Muslim countries are in conflict or face a significant threat of conflict. In contrast, only one out of four non-Muslim countries face similar challenges. But despite these very complex conflict situations, Muslims must be able to differentiate between a conflict involving Muslims, and a “war against Islam.” I do not believe that any of the civilizations — Western, Hindu, Sinic, Buddhist, Japanese — are systematically engaged in a “war against Islam.”

Of all the world’s conflicts, none has captured the passion of Muslims more than the plight of the Palestinians. But this is not a religious issue — there are Christians and Jews in Palestine, and Muslims and Christians in Israel. Nonetheless, the establishment of the much-awaited Palestinian state, in the framework of a two-state solution, would be widely hailed by Muslims worldwide.

But the Palestinians, too, have a moral and political responsibility. It is difficult to attain and sustain statehood unless there is unity among the Palestinian factions. In my meetings with Palestinian leaders, I told them very clearly that Indonesian freedom fighters would have never won the war for independence if they had not united in spirit. The bottom line is that we desperately ne e d to end the vicious cycle of conflict and violence.

The timely withdrawal of Western forces from Iraq and Afghanistan would also alleviate Muslim fears of a Western hegemony. All these political solutions would help reduce terrorism, a crime that deviates from the true teaching of Islam as a religion of peace. It would also turn feelings of fear and humiliation among some Muslims into hope and self-esteem.

The fourth imperative is to strengthen voice s of moderation in our communities.

By nature, moderates are open-minded, flexible and prone to outreach and partnership. By contrast, extremists are xenophobic, and bent on confrontation and exclusion.

We must empower the moderates. They must speak up and defend their mainstream values in the face of opposition from extremists. (In this vein, I find it very encouraging that Western media have unanimously refused to show the very offensive film “Fitna” by the provocative Dutch politician Geert Wilders. This shows the media’s improved sensitivity toward Islam.)The moderates also must be more proactive. Extremists will always capitalize on hopelessness and desperation. We must present a better alternative.

The fifth imperative is multiculturalism and tolerance. The most welcome trend in the 21st century is multiculturalism and tolerance. In the West today, racism is in decline, apartheid is gone, interracial marriages are common and the market place picks talent without regard to color, religion or ethnicity. President Obama reflects this healthy multiculturalism.

We must all work together to ensure that multiculturalism and tolerance become a global norm. But tolerance means full respect for others, si ncerely accepting differences and thriving on mutual diversity. Only this type of tolerance can heal deep-seated hatred and resentment.

Spreading the Wealth of Globalization

The sixth imperative is to make globalization work for all. I do not accept the idea that globalization produces winners and losers. Globalization can be harnessed to make winners for all. There can be no genuine harmony among civilizations as long as the majority of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims feel marginalized and insecure.

These are the sad, hard facts. Out of 57 Muslim-populated countries, 25 are classified as low-income, 18 are lower-middle-income and 14 are upper-middle-income or high-income. And even though one out of every four people in the world are Muslims, their economies constitute just one-tenth of the world economy. One in four people in Muslim countries live in extreme poverty. Almost 300 million Muslims aged 15 and above are illiterate.

Muslims must take ownership of their destiny. Many Muslims reminisce about glory days of centuries past, when Islam was on top of the world. Muslims today must be convinced that Islam’s best years are ahead of it, not in the past.

The 21st century can be the era of a second Islamic renaissance. But to do this, Muslims must, like the remarkable 13th century Muslims before them, be open-minded, innovative, and take risks. There are inspirational Muslims everywhere, from Nobel laureates to intellectuals, athletes and scientists. Countries like the United Arab Emirates and Qatar have shown that with good governance, they can change their for tunes in one generation. Indonesia has shown that Islam, modernity and democracy — plus economic growth and national unity — can be powerful partners.

A recent survey in The Economist found that, for the first time, more than half of the world population can be loosely considered middle class. If this is true, then we have a reasonable chance to reach “zero poverty” worldwide by the end of this century. Getting from here to there would require intense intercultural and interreligious harmony.

The seventh imperative is to reform global governance. While the G-20 is more representati v e of today’s global dynamics, the UN Security Council still reflects the power balance of 1945 rather than 2009. The council needs to be restructured to keep up with today’s geopolitical realities.

Imperative number eight is education. Politicians often overlook educational opportunities in both our homes and our classrooms. But the answers are there; these are the real battlegrounds for the hearts and minds of future generations. It is in these places that we must turn ignorance into compassion, and intolerance into respect. The foot soldiers here are parents, teachers and community leaders. We must help our children to develop a sense of common humanity.

In Indonesia, elementary students are taught to respect religious traditions. Exam questions ask Muslim students what they should do if their Christian neighbors invite them to celebrate Christmas. We are probably the only country in the world where every religious holiday — Islamic, Catholic, Protestant, Hindu and Buddhist — is designated as a national holiday, even though Hindus and Buddhists account for only 2.4 percent of our population. We have sought to ensure that tolerance and respect for religious freedom is part of our transgenerational DNA.

Finally, the ninth imperative is a global conscience. This is what I saw in Aceh after the 2004 tragedy when a giant tsunami killed 200,000 people in half an hour. The whole nation was in grief.

But in this tragedy, we also found humanity. The whole world wept with us, and offered helping hands. Americans, Australians, Singaporeans, Chinese, Mexicans, Indians, Turks and other international volunteers worked hand in hand to help the Acehnese. I realized that there exists a global conscience.

Connectivity, Not Conquest

President Obama spoke in Cairo of a “new beginning” between America and the Muslim world. Today, I say that we can reinvent a new world not of conquest, but of connectivity. It will be a world defined not by a clash of civilizations, but by the confluence of civilizations. It will be a world marked by plenty, not by poverty. And it will be a vast empire of global minds breaking down centuries of collision and hostility.

President Obama insists the 21st century can still be the American Century. I am convinced that this c ould well be Asia’s century.

But can’t it be everybody’s century? This can be an amazing century where hope prevails over fear, where brotherhood of man reigns supreme, where human progress conquers ignorance. In this century, no one loses. And everybody wins.