Search

What role do moderate Islamic organizations play in promoting democratization in Malaysia and Indonesia? What is the difference between large, grassroots organizations and newer more urban-based NGO's? Is one type of organization more effective than the other? This paper looks at the changing dynamics of moderate or progressive Islamic organizations in Malaysia and Indonesia. Some of these groups receive funding and assistance from US sources like the Asia Foundation or USAID. Moderate, progressive, or "liberal" Islamic groups suffer from being perceived as "good" Muslims by US policy makers. Given this inadvertent association, can these organizations effectively promote democracy and human rights to the larger population when that population is so critical and angry at the United States? In other words, are Indonesians and Malaysians more likely to turn away from moderate and progressive Islamic ideas because they may seem to be linked to a US agenda of building liberalism? This paper looks at organizations such as the Liberal Islam Network in Indonesia and Sisters in Islam in Malaysia, as well as others to try and understand the conflict between moderate or progressive Islamic groups and more conservative Islamic forces and to evaluate the role such moderate organizations play in advocating for greater protection of rights and liberties. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to understand why Islamic groups may mobilize violently in certain countries and peacefully in others. In this study, I analyze how the strategies and policies of state leaders shape Islamic organizations? mobilization tactics. I hypothesize that a state?s decision to choose policies of inclusion vs. exclusion, targeted vs. indiscriminate repression, and ideological reinforcement vs. ideological diffusion will influence whether Islamic groups choose to mobilize vs. demobilize, engage the system vs. withdraw, or resort to violence vs. peaceful means to achieve their goals. Employing the comparative case study methodology, I examine how state strategies affect Islamic mobilization in Malaysia, Indonesia and Turkey. My results indicate a robust relationship exists between state policies of inclusion and ideological reinforcement and peaceful and engaged mobilization. In addition, a strong relationship exists between the state policy of arming radical Islamic groups to carry out actions against foreign and domestic enemies and violent mobilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the impact of Muslim organizations and Muslim political parties in Indonesia and Malaysia. Questions addressed are as follows: How does the political system (broadly described) facilitate or constrain the goals of various Muslim organizations (both groups in society and political parties)? What roles do these Muslim organizations play in impacting politics and where (or in what areas of) in the political process are they most effective? Under what circumstances have Muslim associations and/or parties been a force for (or antagonistic to) democratization? Given the ethnic and regional diversity in Malaysia and Indonesia, the initial hypotheses for these questions are as follows: under authoritarian and semi-authoritarian rule Muslim organizations actually have greater opportunities to polarize rhetoric as they appeal to citizens based on claims of moral legitimacy, fulfillment of social welfare needs, and some level of criticism of a restricted or corrupted political order. As a result, PAS, the lead Muslim party (and the dominant opposition party) has limited appeal to voters. Under more democratic conditions, Islamic groups or parties may need to moderate their appeals, and/or build coalitions with secular or non-Islamic groups in order to win power and influence in the larger political system. Muslim political parties exist in both Malaysia and Indonesia; their power and influence has varied over time. This project aims to explain why these parties have had more support at some times than others and under what conditions they may moderate their demands and policy choices to accommodate pluralist leanings. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) in Indonesia and the Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) in Malaysia, noting the roots of the respective parties. The extent of the parties' moderation are analyzed, highlighting the strategic choice to form alliances, the political incentives for moderation, and the learning process parties have experienced, focusing particularly on changes in opportunities for women and non-Muslims.

In 1967 the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was created primarily as a security alliance to function as a bulwark against communism. The founding members were Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines. Today ASEAN has grown into a comprehensive regional organization whose functions include not only security issue but also political, social, economic, and cultural matters. In the subsequent years Brunei Darussalam, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar have joined. As a result, the ten-nation ASEAN contains a population of about 500 million. The characteristics of ASEAN as a regional organization are that it is a highly state-centric organization stressing state sovereignty and noninterference in internal affairs of member states. This article, first, briefly explores theoretical framework of regional organizations. Secondly, the examination is made on regional integration in Asia in the area of human rights. Thirdly, an assessment is made on ASEAN region's efforts to create a regional human rights ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]