MOST LIKELY-SOUTHEAST ASIAN MUSLIMS

M. GUSEV

Candidate of Historical Sciences

Which countries will take the leading positions in the Muslim world? The answer may seem unexpected, but the facts and events of recent years speak convincingly: Most likely, these will be the countries of Southeast Asia (SE)-members of ASEAN: Indonesia and Malaysia. The former is the largest Muslim country, with a population of more than 240 million, at least 85% of which consists of adherents of Islam, a large part of which adheres to radical views or borders with them. In Malaysia, Muslims make up more than half of the population. Islam is the state religion there, and this country traditionally claims a special role in the Islamic world as the bearer of the most balanced and moderate views, giving, as it believes, the right to a leading position among Muslim states. The commitment of millions of people to this religion did not allow and does not allow the elite to ignore this fact in both domestic and foreign policy.

The last third of the last century was marked by unprecedented growth in their economies. At the same time, the ASEAN members themselves argued at that time: "The role of the United States in regional security is one of the important factors for the success of ASEAN. The United States opened the security umbrella under which ASEAN member countries could focus on socio-economic development"¹. Based on this, the main and determining foreign policy factor in the development of the ASEAN countries at this stage was the natural balancing of the twists and turns of the "struggle of worlds" in such a situation and maintaining good relations with the United States. In their domestic policy, the main emphasis was placed on preventing the communist threat and fighting communist insurgents, and this seemed to push aside issues related to the relationship between religion, power and society.

It should immediately be noted that the ruling circles did not always succeed in the latter. In Indonesia, Suharto's totalitarian regime regarded calls for Islamization of the country as a crime with all the ensuing consequences, since they represented a real threat to the existing government. Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad has announced his own program of Islamization of the country, aiming to bring the complex inter-religious and inter-ethnic situation under control and take the initiative away from Islamists. But in the period preceding the emergence of the Islamic factor on the international stage as a self-sufficient force of a global nature, these events in the ASEAN countries were local, local in nature. In general, there was no reason to consider them as a system programmed to achieve a single goal.

The conditions of the Cold War did not encourage the leaders of Muslim countries in the region to care much about their location in the Islamic world. It was much more important for them to establish relations with the United States. Malaysia was somewhat out of this category, but even it, in principle, was forced to obey the general laws of the region's development.

The collapse of the USSR and the system of bipolarity in international relations that disappeared with it dramatically changed the course of historical events. The ideological vacuum created by the collapse of Marxism was quickly filled by adherents of radical Islam, who took up the ideas of the global political struggle for social justice that remained unattended. Although they were clearly incorrectly identified with the Islamic concepts of universal brotherhood and social justice, which were taken out of the context of general norms of behavior of believers, Islam begins to claim the role of an ideological dominant in the world political arena without experiencing competition, which in turn sharply increases attention to religion in the Muslim countries of Southeast Asia.

THE AMERICAN FACTOR VERSUS THE ISLAMIC FACTOR

At the same time, the role of the United States is changing and weakening. In the absence of the communist threat and security concerns, the interest of ASEAN members in an alliance with the United States, although it remains, but goes "to a lower level." In addition, as a result of the so-called counterterrorism activities of the United States in the Muslim world, a stable opinion is formed about them as an enemy of Islam. This makes serious adjustments to the approach of the leaders of the Muslim countries of Southeast Asia to building a system of international relations. The interest in good relations with the Americans, no doubt, remains. But the "American factor" comes into clear contradiction with the Islamic factor. The first "works" for the elite, the second-for the whole country. This begs the question, which of them will triumph or at least temporarily be able to triumph? The answer is not clear. Many opinions are expressed. The author is inclined to believe that there is a lot of evidence in favor of strengthening the role of Islam in the Southeast Asian region.

page 11

In fact, there has already been a sharp activation of Islam and its politicization. In Indonesia, it almost coincided with the collapse of the 30-year period of Suharto's military-totalitarian regime, which pursued a policy of strict regulation of religious activities. The subsequent democratization of a society that was not prepared for such a process resulted in an increase in Islamization, which again was not offered an alternative by competing ideologies. Against the background of glaring social problems, religion, with its unshakable position of universal equality before God, meets the spontaneous desire of the masses for social justice. It is no coincidence that the two presidents who followed Suharto - Habibi and Wahid-were Muslim theologians.

Religion has become a dominant feature of political life. During the campaign for the country's first direct presidential election, both main contenders - Megawati Sukarnoputri and Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono - performed the so-called "small Hajj" to Mecca, which, although it did not coincide with the main Muslim celebrations, provided an opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to Islam. Political opponents used religion to attack their opponents. An influential group of representatives of the largest Muslim association "Nahdatul Ulama" has issued a special fatwa against the election of a woman as the country's leader. There was no doubt that M. Sukarnoputri was meant. Opponents of S. B. Yudhoyono organized a campaign questioning his and his wife's sincere commitment to Islam. The parliamentary election campaign was also saturated with politicized Islam.

Similar processes are taking place in Malaysia. Here, as a result of the last elections in March 2004, a third-generation theologian who knows almost the entire Koran by heart, Abdullah Badawi, became Prime Minister. The political struggle in this country between the leading party of the ruling coalition, OMNO, and the main opposition party, PACE, revolves around the claims of each of them to a monopoly on the correct interpretation of Islam.

In the case of Thailand, the Philippines, and Singapore, they should not be treated with the same standards as Indonesia or Malaysia. The impact of the Islamic factor on their foreign policy course is rather indirect. But it would be a mistake to underestimate him. All the countries listed above are involved in the 40-year process of regional diplomacy within ASEAN, which imposes certain rules of the game on its participants. Their solution of any foreign policy problems is not complete without regard for the Association's partners, especially when it is related to relations in the Islamic world. This was also the case when deciding whether to send a military contingent to Iraq in support of US military operations. Then Indonesia and Malaysia strongly condemned the American aggression. The leaders of Thailand and the Philippines, on the contrary, obviously, based on the fact that in their countries the "American factor" "pulls" the Islamic factor, sent their military personnel to Iraq.

But the story didn't end there. The Islamic factor has shown an amazing resilience and ability to resist. Shortly after the capture of a Filipino hostage, the Philippines was forced to quickly withdraw its contingent from Iraq. As noted in the South-East Asian press, this decision of the Philippine president marked the limits of the apparent inviolability of the military-political alliance with the United States, and also marked a new milestone in the fight against terrorism, when one's own economic interests prevailed over the security interests of another country. Not only the Philippine military personnel were put at risk, but also 7 million people. Filipinos working in the Middle East. Gloria Arroyo was faced with a choice: either to ensure their safety and thereby maintain a substantial and constant flow of foreign currency into the country, or to act at the expense of her own interests in favor of the security of the United States. The president chose the first ².

The Thai contingent was also withdrawn from Iraq, despite US requests to keep at least military engineers. This was done taking into account the situation in the southern Muslim provinces of the country and fears of international Islamic terrorism.

Let's turn again to Indonesia and Malaysia. It is becoming increasingly clear that the dominant force that brought the current leaders to the top of power has a very definite "feedback loop". Muslims here believe that they have the right to expect their elected representatives to realize the interests of Islam in the international arena and take steps to overcome the problems that it has faced as a world religion. Because of this, in order to avoid reproaches for passivity and inaction, the leaders of these countries are literally doomed to strive for leadership in the Islamic world, regardless of their desires.

Recent events give reason to believe that in the context of the increasingly apparent inability of Arab countries to act as a leader and unifier of the Muslim world, the Islamic countries of Southeast Asia are trying to establish themselves in this role. Not satisfied with the peripherality of their position in the Islamic world, these states are striving on the crest of their own activity, if not to outstrip, then at least to become equal among equals in the hierarchy of Muslim countries in the new alignment of forces in the Islamic world, which dictates-

page 12

This is due to the strengthening of the Islamic factor in the international arena.

EVENTS IN LEBANON: VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST ASIA

Among such events, the military actions between Israel and the Shiite Hezbollah movement in Lebanon and the reaction of Indonesia and Malaysia to them deserve special attention. Kuala Lumpur called the use of military force against civilians and Israel's invasion of Lebanon" lawless and irresponsible." Malaysian Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar called on the United Nations to urgently intervene in the Lebanese events to prevent an escalation of violence in the Middle East region. At the 33rd session of the OIC Council of Foreign Ministers held in Baku at the end of June 2006, he stated that the main goals of this organization are " ... the creation of a developed Islamic society and the fight against extremism." "We must make the Islamic Ummah strong," Albar said, and called on the Muslim community to join forces to resist attempts to distort the role of Islam and end the pressure on it. "We must protect our religion."

At an extraordinary session of the OIC in Malaysia, it was decided to send Blue Helmets units from Muslim countries to Lebanon under the UN flag. Three Southeast Asian countries-Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei - have pledged to send a total of more than 2,000 troops. Albar expressed confidence that Malaysia's participation in the UN multinational force would be useful, given its experience in similar operations in Bosnia, as well as the fact that this country currently holds the post of OIC Chair.³ During the conflict, Albar said that the governments of the OIC member states should consider supplying weapons to the Hezbollah movement in Lebanon, so that it would have something to defend itself from an Israeli military invasion. He stressed that " ... Muslim countries will not allow Israel to go unpunished for the crimes it has committed in this country." The Minister also urged not to forget about the difficulties experienced by the Palestinian people, who have become " victims of the Israeli occupation." "No one should interfere in the affairs of the people of Palestine." ⁴

The subject of Israel has a special place in propaganda activities in Indonesia and Malaysia. Not all Southeast Asian Muslims are happy with the fact that some Arab countries have recognized Israel. Both Indonesia and Malaysia do not maintain diplomatic relations with Israel. Southeast Asian Muslims have a strong ideological base of "opposition to Zionism." For this reason, Southeast Asian Muslims are proud of themselves and consider themselves even more "orthodox" than their Arab brothers.

In fact, anti-Israeli motives are adopted in the propaganda arsenal of the Muslim countries of Southeast Asia. This was particularly the case in the speech of Mahathir Mohamad, then practically former Prime Minister of Malaysia, at the OIC Summit in Kuala Lumpur in October 2003. In those days, in an effort to gain additional popularity in the Muslim world, he did not spare swearing at the Zionists. The speech of the outgoing prime Minister received a wide response. In the Russian press, it was referred to as the "protocols of the Malaysian sage","deadly words" ⁵ or "anti-Semitic scandal"⁶. It focused on the problem of the confrontation between the Muslim world and the West and fueled anti-Western and especially anti-Semitic sentiments. It is no coincidence that in some cases it was considered as an impetus for the anti-Jewish terrorist attack in Istanbul that followed immediately after the summit, with a large number of victims.

Other speeches by politicians in Malaysia and Indonesia condemning Israel after its invasion of Lebanon in 2006 are also memorable.Tel Aviv then tried to establish a dialogue with these countries through its Ambassador in Singapore. Demanding the unconditional withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon, Malaysia, as the OIC Chairman, categorically refused any dialogue with Israel, explaining the decision primarily by the lack of diplomatic relations with this country. In those days, Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi used the rostrum of the OIC to call on the international community, and especially the countries of the Middle East, to end diplomatic relations with Israel.⁷ "This is the only way we can express our collective protest against his invasion of Lebanon, which mostly targets civilians," echoed his Foreign Minister. ⁸

Indonesia is also striving to take an equally active position on this issue, which is also largely designed for external effects. The Government and Parliament expressed concern over the" abduction " of the Deputy Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority by the Israeli military.⁹ After becoming a non-permanent member of the Security Council for a two-year term effective January 1, 2007, Indonesia immediately prepared a document entitled "Statement by the President of the UN Security Council on the Middle East, including Palestine". It focuses on " Israeli raids targeting civilians." Although the United States, France and some other members of the Security Council have called the document "unbalanced," Indonesia attaches great importance to this step.

Indonesia held a meeting in Jakarta at the end of January 2007. International Forum of Parliamentarians of Muslim Countries. Representatives of 28 countries with predominantly Muslim populations - Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Mauritania, Qatar, Sudan, Pakistan, Palestine, Tajikistan, Turkey, Yemen, Syria and others-participated in the forum. At the initiative of the event's organizer, Indonesia, the main topic of discussion was national unity and security issues, mainly related to the events taking place in Palestine. Indonesian President Yudhoyono said Jakarta hopes to establish an independent and sovereign Palestinian State in the near future. The largest Muslim country in the world initiated the following initiatives:-

page 13

The Group is ready to hold talks between Fatah and Hamas leaders in Jakarta, where it is ready to mediate.

IRANIAN LEADER IN INDONESIA AND MALAYSIA

The Indonesian President promised that his country will persist in pursuing the "Islamic agenda" in the international community, seek a peaceful solution to the Middle East conflict, including the problem of Lebanon, and fight against manifestations of Islamophobia.¹⁰ Such attempts by Indonesian diplomacy to take part in solving the most acute problems of the Middle East are no longer a revelation. This is proved by the visit of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Indonesia and Malaysia in March 2006. It was extremely important for him to get the support of "friendly Islamic countries" and recognition of the peaceful nature of Iran's uranium enrichment program.

As expected, the nuclear issue has become the leitmotif of the Iranian leader's political dialogue with the leaders of Indonesia and Malaysia. Judging by its results, the main task of M. Ahmadinejad's visit was successfully solved: President S. B. Yudhoyono and Malaysian Prime Minister A. Badawi confirmed the peaceful orientation of the Iranian nuclear program. Then, wanting to meet the leaders of both countries halfway and taking into account their interests, M. Ahmadinejad included in his delegation one of the authoritative representatives of the highest Shiite clergy, Secretary General of the International Association for the Rapprochement of Islamic Legal Schools Ayatollah M. A. Tashiri (previously served as head of the Organization of Islamic and Cultural Relations - one of the main elements of the propaganda machine of the Islamic regime). At the same time, the talks showed that the ambitious plans of the Indonesian leadership are far from fully resonating with Tehran. When Jakarta offered its assistance in reducing tensions in Iran-US relations, clearly seeking to gain the status of a mediator in the settlement (which would clearly help strengthen its authority in the Muslim world), President M Ahmadinejad made it clear that the proposal would not be taken seriously. He explained that Tehran prefers to "make its own decisions on determining the fate of its country"; therefore, it does not need intermediaries in the dialogue with the United States11.

Far from being discouraged by such a reaction from Iran, President Yudhoyono offered to participate in the settlement of the Iraq crisis, appealing to the Americans. At the same time, the emphasis was again placed on solving the problem by the forces of Muslim countries under the auspices of Indonesia. These sentiments were fully expressed during the US President's 6-hour visit to Indonesia on November 20, 2006. Ahead of the visit, security agencies warned President Yudhoyono that large-scale protests were being prepared over the issue. The forecasts were fully justified. Even before the arrival of the American president, about 500 representatives of radical Islamic organizations staged a protest demonstration at the US embassy. The protesters, led by the Islamic Defenders Front and other radical Islamic groups, shouted anti - American slogans and unfurled banners reading" Bush is a terrorist with the face of a villain "and" The true terrorist is the United States." "We call on the government and people of Indonesia to prevent Bush from coming "..." This man has caused a lot of harm to the world, especially in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine, " said a representative of the protesters.

The President of the country, given the situation, limited himself to calling on his citizens not to protest "excessively" against the visit, not forgetting about the duty of hospitality. It didn't bring much results. Habib Rizik, the leader of the Islamic Defenders Front, said that the deaths of Muslims around the world must be avenged. During the visit, about 5,000 protesters organized a "coalition to destroy Bush", shouting his name and chanting at the same time: "Kill, kill!". Protesters warned President Yudhoyono and Vice President Yusuf Kalla that by accepting Bush, they were questioning their victory in the next election in 2009. The leader of the Islamic Prosperity and Justice Party, which won the most votes in the last parliamentary elections in Jakarta, Tifatul Sembiring, blamed Bush for the deaths of 650,000 Iraqis as a result incursions by US-led coalition forces.

Despite manifestations of anti-Americanism in Indonesia and a number of other Southeast Asian countries, divergent views on what is happening in the Middle East, etc., Washington and Jakarta manage to maintain apparently good relations based on mutual interest. The United States, in all likelihood, for lack of other candidates or, in any case, not having a significant choice, intends to use Indonesia as a" window " to the Islamic world. Past negotiations confirm this. Indonesia has called for a global

page 14

The group called for "thinking about solving the Iraqi problem" and put forward its own plan for a step-by-step solution to the Iraqi crisis, which focuses on "the inevitability of the US withdrawal from Iraq." This was stated by Yudhoyono at a joint press conference of the two presidents following Bush's visit. It is hard to imagine that the text of the statement was not agreed by the parties. Yudhoyono expressed his conviction that a legally elected government should remain in power in Iraq, capable of governing the country independently, provided that full reconciliation is achieved in it. He also added that after the withdrawal of the coalition forces, either UN peacekeeping troops or units of another, third force (meaning the Organization of the Islamic Conference) should be introduced into Iraq.

The need for this, according to official Jakarta, is dictated by fears that after the imminent, according to Yudhoyono, withdrawal of American soldiers from Iraq, a "power vacuum" may form there. Military personnel from fraternal Muslim countries would not be perceived by the local population as" enemies of Iraq " and could support law and order in this country during the transition period. As stated by the Indonesian Foreign Minister H. Virayuda,"...Indonesia would like to send its peacekeeping troops to Iraq, thus setting an example to other countries of the Islamic world." It is no coincidence that in a telephone conversation with him, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice supported the idea of involving "moderately Muslim" Indonesia directly in the national reconciliation process in Iraq. According to him, he has already discussed this issue with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during the 14th APEC summit in Hanoi.

WAITING FOR AN IRAQI SETTLEMENT

Indonesia also outlined its position on the decision of the American president to send an additional 20 thousand troops to Iraq. American military personnel. According to Viraud, this " will not deter further escalation of the armed conflict." Moreover, the military presence of the United States and its allies in Iraq " creates all these problems." "Therefore, we are in favor of expanding the participation of other members of the international community in resolving the Iraq crisis," he said. Virayuda ¹². Now Indonesia is interested in sending its military contingent to Iraq in order to be among the initiators of such a significant peacekeeping event. This event fully fits into the intentions of President Yudhoyono, expressed by him in his first speech on foreign policy issues. In May 2005, he stated that he wanted to be a peacemaker, create an atmosphere of mutual trust, and build bridges to solve complex international problems. And now the West is not averse to considering Indonesia as a" bridge " to restore relations with the Islamic world. These sentiments are being played up by the Indonesian president, who clearly has far-reaching plans in this regard. Apparently, this is the reason for the restrained form and content of official Jakarta's reaction to the verdict of Saddam Hussein, dictated by the desire for a win-win political game in the domestic and foreign arena.

In all likelihood, there is reason to consider the two-day visit of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to Indonesia and Malaysia on January 30-31, 2007, as one of the stages of changing the balance of power in the Muslim world, to which both countries have already made a lot of efforts. This event does not fit into the category of an exchange of visits by leaders of "friendly Muslim states" - it is something much more. The meeting of the leaders is based on the desire to redefine spheres of influence at a time when the leadership, coordination, and unification functions in relation to the Muslim world are clearly weakened by its traditional center - the Arab "component".

Pervez Musharraf held talks with Indonesian President S. B. Yudhoyono and Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi. The negotiators, who are backed by many millions of their subjects who are zealous supporters of Islam, cannot be satisfied with the facts of the intensive invasion of the West in the Islamic world, the strengthening of the US role in the Middle East (which was explicitly stated at the talks), the ever-increasing process of dividing Arab countries into supporters and opponents of the US, and the in this process. The reason for the meeting was not issues related to the development of bilateral relations, but issues directly affecting the situation in the Muslim world: the situation in Palestine, the Lebanese and Iraqi crises, and ways to resolve the Iranian nuclear program.

The parties came to a mutual understanding of the need to strengthen the unity of Muslim countries in order to create a counterbalance to the strengthening of US influence in the Middle East region. Expressing concern about the tensions between Sunnis and Shiites, Yudhoyono and Musharraf proposed holding an international Muslim conference with the participation of clerics who adhere to different interpretations of Islam. The planned agenda is the development of a fatwa aimed at achieving peace and harmony in the Middle East. Yudhoyono called on the leaders of Indonesia's two largest Muslim associations -

page 15

Nahdatul Ulama and Muhammadiyya ,which have tens of millions of supporters, assume responsibility for the conference.

It is obvious that the conference of Indonesian and British Muslims on the theme "Islam - a religion of peace, mercy and tolerance", which took place almost at the same time in London, can also be considered as evidence that Indonesia has engaged in a broad propaganda campaign to improve its image in the international arena, and ultimately to achieve a higher level places in the hierarchy of Muslim states. During the talks, it was suggested that it would be expedient to create a forum of "like-minded Islamic countries", where hopes for resolving crisis situations would be pinned. However, there was no explanation of the phrase "like-minded Islamic countries". However, this idea was later supported in Kuala Lumpur by the Malaysian Prime Minister, OIC Chairman A. Badawi.

Musharraf said at the end of the talks that Indonesia and Malaysia support peace initiatives to achieve harmony in the Islamic world, which, according to the President of Pakistan, will be carried out on the principles of justice. He refused to disclose them to journalists, citing the lack of time, but said that he would, like the President of Indonesia, discuss them with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.¹³

The development by the negotiators of a program of joint actions to normalize the situation in the Middle East without the participation of the countries located in it gives grounds to consider the visit of the President of Pakistan as an action to regroup forces in the Islamic world, aimed at weakening the influence of these states and then seizing the positions they have won.

CAPITAL AMBITIONS OF THE ISLAMIC PERIPHERY

In fact, this event may turn out to be a turning point. Its main result will thus be a redistribution of forces from Arab countries in favor of the most active and numerous Islamic periphery. In addition, the negotiators themselves are concerned not only with the fate of the Islamic world, but also with quite pragmatic interests related to the shift of spheres of influence in it in their own direction. There is a lot of evidence for this. In particular, Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayuda told reporters that the two leaders discussed strengthening the role of non - Arab OIC member states. As he went on to say, this could breathe new life into the process of improving the situation in the Middle East.¹⁴

In Malaysia, the two leaders also discussed options for enhancing the role of non - Arab OIC member States in resolving Middle East issues.¹⁵ If we continue to look at the events related to the role that Indonesia and Malaysia have defined for themselves, then the negotiations with Pakistan can be assessed as the next stage in increasing their influence in the Islamic world.

The rapid development of the situation should also be noted. So far, these two countries, united by a common goal, are working together. However, it is known for certain about their rivalry for leadership in ASEAN. It is difficult to predict what the results of the current situation will be. But the fact that the intrigue exists is indisputable.

Judging the prospects of quite likely battles for leadership in the Muslim world, it is obvious that one should not discount the President of Iran, M. Ahmadinejad. His claims in this regard have also been repeatedly voiced. The struggle for primacy, power and influence in the Muslim world is likely to grow. It can be assumed that one of the possible solutions to this situation in the absence of a charismatic leader in the Islamic world who can stop the growing rivalry will be that this world will be divided into spheres of influence. The main players in this field are named in the article.

¹ Hong Mark, Singapore's Ambassador to Russia. Speech at an international conference at MGIMO University of the Russian Foreign Ministry on September 24, 1997.

² The Straits Times, 20.07.2004.

³ ITAR-TASS. Pulse of the planet, APR, 21.07.06.

⁴ Ibid., 09.08.06.

⁵ Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 07.10.03, 19.11.03.

⁶ Izvestia, 18.10.03.

⁷ BERNAMA, 05.08.06.

⁸ ITAR-TASS. Pulse of the planet, APR, 20.06.06.

⁹ Ibid., 03.07.06.

¹⁰ Ibid., 15.01.07.

^www.iimes.ru 11, 15.05.06.

¹² ITAR-TASS. Pulse of the planet, APR, 15.01.07.

¹³ Topica Email List Directori, 03.02.07.

¹⁴ Indonesia News. Net, 03.02.07.

¹⁵ Malaysia News. Net, 04.02.07.