In this chapter, I deal with a number of dilemmas for Islamism in pluralist politics and their impact on electoral strategy. I discuss in particular the hesitation of Islamist parties to promote shari'ah issues until after the June 1999 elections. I argue that these parties were uncertain about voters’ preferences; during the early democratic period they, therefore, concentrated on issues of broader political reform.

HIGHLIGHTING POPULAR ISSUES OVER SHARI'AH CONCERNS

It is crucial to note that the 1998 student-led reformasi movement did not put pressure on political parties to Islamize the state and constitution. This greatly influenced the policies and strategies of Islamist parties in the immediate reformasi era. At the outset, no Islamist party had an official shari'ah policy. The electoral strategy of Partai Persatuan Pembangunan (“Unity Development Party”, PPP), Partai Bulan Bintang (“Crescent Star Party”, PBB) and Partai Keadilan (“Justice Party”, PK) was based on a staunchly reformist agenda. They did not want to appear sectarian, while at the same time they wanted to ensure a broad appeal to Muslims. Between 1998 and mid-2000, they only showed determination on those Islamist issues deemed uncontroversial and which did not seem to cost votes in the elections. The reason for downplaying shari'ah goals was the uncertainty over voters’ response. It appeared to be more helpful for political survival to focus on issues of broader political reform. Also, accentuating shari'ah issues was likely to leave Islamist parties open to charges of sectarianism and endanger their democratic credentials. With the elections scheduled for June 1999, only a little more than a year after the fall of the old regime, it was crucial to avoid any images of Islamist politics as divisive.

Then, in mid-2000, PBB and PPP added shari'ah to their agenda. The policy outlook of PK, by contrast, was steadier as it temporarily put aside shari'ah goals. This cloaked the party's underlying dogmatism and unbending worldview. All Islamist parties, therefore, pursued a strategy that differentiated between short-term and long-term concerns. After the end of the New Order, it was paramount for parties to struggle to foster democracy and combat corruption. Both the Islamist and the secular-national camp believed these issues to have great popular appeal. The shared claim to defend reformasi ideals meant that in the early democratic period, ideological differences between Islamists, pluralist Muslims, and secular-nationalists were somewhat hidden.