From Instruction to Consultative: Reposition of Pesantren in the Collaboration of Religious Radicalization Policy in Indonesia

This study examined the urgency of the reconstruction of the Pondok pesantren position in the religious de-radicalization policy in Indonesia. Islamic boarding school (henceforth: Pondok Pesantren) yet is only positioned as a subordinate institution or as an object of de-radicalization policy in the collaboration of institutional design. As a result, the relationship model that is built is the instructive pattern from the government to Pondok pesantren. This, factually, does not contribute to the positive effect on the effectiveness of the deradicalization policy. The question of this research was how the relationship model or ideal position of Pondok pesantren in the collaboration of institutional design in religious de-radicalization policy? The research data were collected through interviews, documentation, and literature study, which then were analyzed descriptively. This study summed up that the consultative model would guarantee more toward the support of institutional design in the collaboration of religious de-radicalization policy in Indonesia; to protect the unity of the nation on one hand, and optimize the role of Pondok pesantren on the other hand.


A. Introduction
Indonesia is now confronted with two serious problems regarding (Islamic) religious issues to keep the unity of the nation. Those two problems are: (1) the amount of (radicalism) violence in the name of religion, and (2) the strengthening of Islamism which not only puts forward the identity but also moves forward Islam as a doctrine as Muslim. Thus, they are obsessed to establish an Islamic state in Indonesia (Khilafah). Truly, those religious issues had been over in 1945 when the founding fathers agreed to make Indonesia a nation based on Pancasila and not as (Islamic) religious state.
From the perspective of social science, the term radicalism has characteristics that can be related to personal or group dissatisfaction toward the existence of the status quo and guidance toward something that has been established to do fundamental change toward certain problems (Susanto, 2007). Hence, the relation between social radicalism perspective and the strengthening of Islamism, that not only puts forward the identity as Muslim but also moves forward Islam as a doctrine and ideology, raise various religious organization that is politically oriented, such as Hizbut Tahrir, Front Pembela Islam, Komite Persiapan Penegakan Islam, Laskar Jihad, Jamaah Islam Ahlussunah Waljamaah, Forum Ulama Ummat Islam Indonesia and Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia (Turmudi, 2005).
As for the amount of radicalism violence issues in the name of religion are explained by Azra (1999) from the perspective of Islamic radicalism. According to him, (Islamic) religious radicalism/ fundamentalism is the extreme type of indication of "revivalism". If revivalism is the Islamic intensification that is inward-oriented and individual, so radicalism/fundamentalism is the Islamic intensification that is also directed out until the coercive effort rises. Mahendra (1999) added that religious radicalism has some characteristics: [1] it tends to interpret holy book texts rigidly and textually; [2] it inclines to monopolize the truth of holy book interpretation (Tafsir) and even recognizes itself as the authority holder as the most valid interpretation of religion so that it considers other groups of people are misguided and lawful to be despised; [3] it has a priori view on ideology and western cultures. The accumulation of those three characteristics in several cases triggers the movement with violence/terrorism.
The issues mentioned above encourage the government to set up the de-radicalization program of religious understanding to dispel radicalism and terrorism. According to Bakti (2004), there are two strategies of the Indonesian Government in supporting the implementation of deradicalization that has been done so far, particularly since the tragedy of the Bali Bomb in 2002. The first strategy is by changing the thinking paradigm of the main group and militant to not act radical terrorism after serving a sentence. The second strategy is ideological deterrence. This strategy is designed for all people to not be easily influenced by doctrine and radical terrorism action. One of the objects of this strategy is a religious educational institution, particularly Pondok pesantren.

The choice on the religious educational institution including
Pondok pesantren as the object of de-radicalization policy was caused by a huge presumption that the pattern of religious educational institutions in Indonesia was proven to get involved in developing the radicalism understanding and action because the majority of the perpetrators were the alumni of religious education. The research conducted by Ahmed (2004) also mentioned that Islamic education faced serious problems and one of them is the narrow pattern of Islamic education that encourages the growth of religious chauvinism.
The religious de-radicalization policy that is set by the government in the form of socialization, counseling, training, facilities, and other programs ends up on the truth of the assumption that de-radicalization policy which makes Pondok pesantren as its object is a part of the assumption that all Pondok pesantren has been affected radicalism.
Whereas Pondok pesantren, with its sub-system, is one of the civil societies that can be the agent in preventing and handling radicalism movement in the name of (Islamic) religion The contribution of Pondok pesantren and civil society organizations toward the success of policy and development generally has been put  (INFID). First, Pondok pesantren and other civil society organizations have been proven to play important roles in reforming the state and intervening in the power of capital (market). Second, the groups of civil society need political space to play the role well and legally (INFID, 1999, in Basori, 2017. The study of Harney and Olivia (2003) in Indonesia also explained that the availability of 'political space' is needed and believed as a part of the effort in forming democratic governance. Third, Pondok pesantren and civil society can contribute to the positive goals of government administration through constructive feedback and advocacy. Some of the findings showed that the Pondok pesantren position as the object of policy is not appropriate. Like the object, the Pondok pesantren position is the subordinate of the government so that there is no alignment among governments. Thus, Pondok pesantren has no space and opportunity to do deradicalization in the design of the formal, legal, and inclusive organization.
Islamic educational institutions in some countries have significant roles and positions in developing human resources. In Egypt for example, the University of al-Azhar as the oldest Islamic education institution in the world has been successfully graduating a reforming generation in the Islamic world so that its influence significantly impacts the type of thought of Muslim scholars in Indonesia (Sukino, 28: 2016). This is similar to what happened in Middle East Countries. In Turkey, Islamic educational institutions also have a strategic position and roles in state development (Habibi: 2018). In Southeast Asia such as Malaysia and Thailand particularly in some areas such as Pattani, Setul, Yala, and Narathiwat, Islamic educations including Pesantren and Madrasah have been the main identity of Islam (Susanto, 2015: 72).
Looking at the big roles of Pondok pesantren as Islamic educational institutions in Indonesia, it is enough to argue the importance of the better relation model between the government and Pondok pesantren in designing the appropriate organizational framework. In implementing this institutional design framework, what is needed to make religious de-radicalization policy gain its goals? The answer to this question will be explained further in this article.
This study aims to describe the urgency of pesantren's position in the religious understanding de-radicalization program in Indonesia. The position of pesantren is not appropriate to be put only as an object of the de-radicalization program and as subordinate, but it needs to be a subject in the same position with different roles.
The study of de-radicalization has been conducted by many researchers. However, the study that focuses on relationship patterns between subject and object, as well as stakeholders in this program, has not been done yet. This research theme will be the focus of the writer's study. This research is the first research that connects the government position with Pondok pesantren in the religious de-radicalization policy.
Besides, the choice to build this consultative relationship model (the second model above the instructive model) not on the delegation model (the highest level above the instructive model) aims to keep the government dignity in terms of authority and court function.
This study is important to build a comprehensive understanding of the implementation of collaborative policy in the religious deradicalization program by aims to prevent radicalism and terrorism in Indonesia. Besides, this study becomes an important suggestion for policymakers in running collaborative governmental programs.

The Concept of Religious De-Radicalization
Charles E. Allen as cited by Angel Rabasa stated that deradicalization is generally identified as the process of the adoption of extremist belief, including the willingness to support and facilitate violence as a method to influence social change. De-radicalization is the process to leave the extremist view and concludes that extremism and violence cannot be used to influence social changes. Omar Ashour in his International Crisis Group (ICG) in its report, Deradicalization, and Indonesian  November 2007 stated that deradicalization is the most basic, an effort to persuade terrorists and their supporters to abandon the use of violence (Golose, 2010: 164). John Horgan, the Director of International Center for the Study of Terrorism in Pennsylvania, defined "deradicalize" as a combination of two terms that has a different understanding, but it has the same purpose, to make terrorist leave their terrorism action in a form of violence (Golose, 2010: 80).
De-radicalization is a program initiated by the government in cooperation with other institutions. De-radicalization is a process where the groups of radicalism change their strong ideology and delegitimize the use of violent methods to gain political purposes, meanwhile, they also move to the acceptance gradually toward politics, economy, and other changes (Omar Ashour in Striegher, 2013: 21).
De-radicalization of religious understanding can be said as the processes to neutralize ideology, radicalism, and militant to justify extreme ways in performing Islamic preaching. The term radical means justifying anyways by violence to anyone considered as enemies and threatening the existence of Islam, moreover the existence of radicalism groups. Deradicalization understanding is done through an interdisciplinary approach softly by interpreting religious text contextually and putting forward the humanity values, inclusivity values, the values of unity, and brotherhood among humans (Mustofa: 2019).

The Rationality of Collaborative Governance in the Deradicalization Program
This sub-chapter is important to answer the question, Can the religious de-radicalization policy be explained from the perspective of collaborative governance? Referring to Chemma's classification (in Keban, 2008), the paradigm of government administration now has reached the paradigm of governance. According to him, there are four phases of paradigm development in government administration; the phase of traditional public administration, public management, and new public management, which then are perfected by the fourth phase, the governance. In that perspective, the government administration is the process of coordination, management, and influence with every relation or interaction between government and people.
According to Kooiman (2012), the paradigm development of government administration is a logical consequence to fulfill the requirement of pattern change of socio-politics interaction between government and society. That pattern should be different from the pattern of traditional public administration which is fundamental in the top-down relationship perspective, or the approach "national-center-regulation". However, this doesn't mean leaving all ideas conceived by the government in serving or controlling people's socio-economy and politics (Kooiman, 2012).
Concerning the concept of reinventing government, the religious de-radicalization policy is also an effort of government anticipation to reduce the problem before the problem of terrorism becomes serious the next day. This is in line with the concept of anticipatory government from Osborne and Gaebler (1996). The awareness of limited capability, human resources, or networks that become a factor to support the implementation of the policies is realized by the government. The awareness of limitation supports the government to cooperate with various parties, particularly civil society organizations (including Pondok pesantren). The outcome of the cooperation in the organization forum results in collaborative cooperation as well as a positive contribution to achieving the goals of the policies (Purwanti, 2016).
Based on the three arguments, the paradigm of governance, reinventing governance as well as the awareness of the government on limited human resources in the policy implementation, the religious deradicalization in Indonesia is a rational policy to explain and do in the perspective of collaborative governance. The four aspects in collaborative governance; 1) starting conditions, 2) institutional design, 3) facilitative leadership, and 4) collaborative process are discussed or done simultaneously or only choose one of them, it is optional.

The Institutional Design in the Collaborative Governance
Ansell and Gash (2007)  Institutionalization can be seen as a code of behavior that has the potential to reduce uncertainty and mediation of various interests (Ostrom, 2005in Susanti, 2016. Next, the institutionalization as a collaborative forum is designed through formal legality (either with an incentive or not) so the involvement of stakeholders can be optimized. The limitation of roles and procedures also becomes an important aspect to assert in forming the legality of the collaborative forum. Ansell and Gash (2007) confirmed that one of the fundamental problems in the context of institutional design is about access to its collaborative process which emphasizes that the collaborative process should be opened and inclusive for the stakeholders involved. Therefore, the minimum aspect that must be fulfilled in institutional design is the inclusive participation, the explicit basic rules, the use of orderly deadline, and the formal exclusive forum that has specific roles to achieve the purpose of the policy, and functional approach not the structural ones in collaborator membership in the collaborative forum (Mukhlis, 2018).

The Relation Model in the Institutional Design
From the perspective of government administration, there is some relationship model between central government and organization units under its structural function that relates to the de-centralization matters. In some cases, this relation model is also used to assess and analyze, not only relationships among units but also between the government and civil society regarding the implementation of the policy. By the assumption that Pondok pesantren is also a group of civil society that influences the success of religious de-radicalization policy in Indonesia and has its urgency in the reconstruction of institutional design, this relationship model can be a reference.
According to Hersey and Blanchard (2013), four situational relationship patterns can be used by the government to the regional government or group of civil society. The first is the instructive relationship pattern, where the government roles are more dominant than the regional governments or groups of civil society because they can't run the policy. The second is the consultative relationship pattern, where the intervention of government is less because the groups of civil society or regional government are considered capable to contribute to the policy implementation. The third is the participative relationship pattern, where the government doesn't intervene because the regional government has good independence. The fourth is the delegated relationship pattern, where the government has no intervention because the regional government has been capable and independent in running the regional autonomy or because groups of civil society are recognized as having the capability to fulfill their needs. (2012) also stated that the role of the community in collaborative governance doesn't mean to leave all ideas managed by the government on its existence with the various instrument and its authority can be used to serve and control community socio-economy and socio-politics.

C. Method
This article is the result of qualitative research. This study is based on the theories explained in the literature review which is then conducted by collecting data, analyzing data, and concluding the study. This method still In short, the research design can be displayed in the following chart:

D. Result and Discussion 1. Result
This research found two important points regarding the collaborative program in religious de-radicalization. First, even though religious de-radicalization in Lampung province used the collaborative paradigm, however, in fact, Pondok pesantren is positioned as the object. Pondok pesantren with all elements inside it is used only as complement and subordinate. The second, the relation between the state and Pondok pesantren as civil society organizations has not been equal to the policy of the religious de-radicalization program. Whereas, the position of Pondok pesantren is so potential to succeed in the program, knowing that human resources in pesantren are sufficient to conduct religious understanding de-radicalization.
The things mentioned above showed that the paradox, regarding the position of Pondok pesantren in the institutional design of collaborative governance in religious de-radicalization programs, exists. On one hand, the principle of governance and collaborative governance must be built based on public involvement (including Pondok pesantren). However, on the other hand, the domination of the government is seen obviously by positioning Pondok pesantren in religious de-radicalization policies in a very instructive relationship pattern.

a. Religious De-Radicalization Policy for Pondok Pesantren
Nationally, Hikam (2016) mentioned that the policy of deradicalization in Indonesia today is not only developed through rehabilitation but also developed as an effort of contra-ideology. Various models that have been done by the government are closer to hard approach by forming particular troops of anti-terrorism, that is Densus 88, whereas, in a soft approach, the government forms new organization under the Ministry of Politics, Law, and Security, namely National Council of Terrorism Prevention (BNPT), and forms Coordination Forum of Terrorism Prevention (FKPT) in the regional district as its partner. Furthermore, BNPT launched a deradicalization program and ant-radicalization.
The government also arranged a program either for short term or long term programs, which prefers using the soft approach to the hard approach. In short term programs, the government strictly said through an official statement in facing terrorism in Indonesia such as the statement "the declaration to fight against any terrorism threat around the world". Besides, the government also did socialization the danger of terrorism threat, including the expansion control in some provinces to control terrorism movement. For the long-term program, the government did the socialization and interactive dialogue as well as intensive communication to encourage people and form commitment to fight against terrorism.
Deradicalization; a program with a soft approach is a step to support broader counterterrorism and counter-radicalization strategies. Until now, the established de-radicalization strategy was deemed successful in minimizing terrorist acts and regeneration. This strategy is implemented in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and elsewhere to tackle radicalism and terrorism through a combination of education, vocational training, religious dialogue, and post-release programs that help prisoners rejoin society (Mukri & Mustofa: 2019).
There are at least two kinds of deradicalization, explicit deradicalization, and implicit deradicalization. Explicit deradicalization is aimed directly at terrorist prisoners who justify the ideology of violence. This deradicalization aims to delegitimize the use of violence, with a direct confrontational approach to prisoners' minds. Direct deradicalization programs in Muslim countries (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Yemen, Indonesia) or countries with sizable Muslim minorities (Singapore), explicit deradicalization efforts are undertaken by moderate Muslim clerics who involve prisoners in theological dialogue about what they perceive about a correct interpretation of the Qur'an (Kruglanski et al., 2014: 87-88) Meanwhile, implicit deradicalization avoids ideological confrontation and focuses on the needs and emotions of prisoners. This model introduces alternative ways of significance and/or alternative objectives that are compatible with these methods. The motivation for this indirect deradicalization is spread to their hearts. Implicit deradicalization efforts involve vocational education courses where the possibility of reintegration into society, thus regaining a sense of personal significance in a harmonious (vs extremist) way that is compatible with various problems. Involving detainees' families in the rehabilitation process is another implicit way to activate non-biological problems that are incompatible with cruel sacrifices for a purpose (Kruglanski et al., 2014: 88) Technically, the research result showed that the prevention of radical terrorism understanding conducted by BNPT and FKPT is done through formalistic ways such as interactive dialogue approach in hotels form of local wisdom that grows and develops in society particularly Pondok pesantren that spreads widely around Indonesia.

b. The Analysis of Pesantren Position in Collaborative Institutional Design
The first condition from the successful collaboration is that collaboration must be inclusive to all parties who care and are influential toward the issue of policy (Chislip andLarson, 1994 in Ansell andGash, 2007). In the implementation of religious de-radicalization policies, this process is ideally started by identifying the stakeholders who have successfully influenced the success of the policy. Pondok pesantren as a group of civil society that has a big influence on the success of the de-radicalization policies is not involved, instead of being a participant of socialization.
The consequence of this fact is that there is still an apathy showed Normatively, Chislip, and Larson (in Ansell and Gash, 2007) confirmed that participation inclusivity in the collaborative forum must be built because it becomes the factor of collaboration success. However, from the elaboration of this sub-chapter, it can be concluded that the participation of Pondok pesantren in religious de-radicalization policy is still low. Nevertheless, from the perspective of the purpose of the religious deradicalization policy, it showed that the purpose is accepted very well by the group of Pondok pesantren in East Lampung. There is no rejection of this program even though it is found some weaknesses in its implementation.
The second condition in collaborative governance is the existence of basic rules as a part of institutional design that becomes the legitimacy of the collaboration process because of its relation to transparency. It means that the stakeholders who will cooperate believe that the negotiation can happen in the collaboration and there will be no personal domination in the collaboration process (Ansell and Gash, 2007). The basic rules can be in the form of procedure, standard, or certain limitations about things that can or cannot be done either in the form of a written agreement or non-written agreement that is made transparently. The transparent basic rules are made to minimize the rate of conflict among stakeholders in this collaboration (O'Leary andBingham, 2007 in Susanti, 2016).
If various social actors effectively participate in desertification control, collaborative governance would be possible in a stronggovernment society, even if the government might play a more important role than in non-strong government societies, because the role of government lies on a continuum (''at one end there is no government involvement, that is, total free-market control, and, at the other end, total national government control over environmental policy''), and a stronggovernment society is in between (Yang, 2017: 3).
Skillern and Silver explained that there were four network principles for collaboration success. 1) A strategy is determined by mission impact before organizational growth; 2) Building partnerships based on trust, not control; 3) Promoting others; 4) Building constellations (Wei-Skillern & Silver, 2013).
If it is related to that concept, in the context of religious deradicalization policy, there will be no written or unwritten basic rules arranged, because there is no formal institution formed to involve Pondok pesantren in its implementation, besides the FKPT in the level of the province as the elite forum. All research informants also recognized that no agreement becomes a fundamental argument to involve Pondok pesantren in implementing the policy. The presence or the absence of Pondok pesantren in the meeting will not imply the de-radicalization policies made by the government.
According to Ansell and Gash (2007), the third variable of institutional design that influenced the collaboration process is the transparent process with a clear time target. The transparent process showed the good intention of the collaborators to make a collaboration forum the only space to argue and build the agreement or consensus formally so that it is not true if the consensus occurs outside the forum. As for the time target in the collaboration is important because it can be an evaluation of the goals to achieve. Susanti (2016) stated that the transparent process is close to its relation to the obvious basic rules as the second variable of institutional design in collaborative governance, meanwhile, in the use of time, there must be a realistic schedule that is arranged based on the goals to achieve. Therefore, all argumentation and risk assumptions must be considered well before deciding the time target. Because there is no formal forum made as a collaborative forum with the involvement of Pondok pesantren, thus the transparent process with the clear time target will never happen in the implementation of de-radicalization policies.
Besides the three findings in the aspect of institutional design as the pre-requirement of the success of the collaboration, the absence of participation because of the lack of collaborative forum, undrawn basic rules, and the unclear process and time target are also found about the instability of Pondok pesantren representation in the meeting and socialization that is done either by BNPT or FKPT. If it is related to the first variable from the institutional design in the collaboration, the successful collaboration is the collaboration that must be inclusive to all stakeholders who concern toward the policy issues, thus the instability of Pondok pesantren representation that focuses on the following training, or socialization organized by BNPT or FKPT also influences directly on the success of religious de-radicalization policies Based on the fact above, instead of hoping the appearance of consultative relationship pattern, where the government intervention is less because Pondok pesantren is recognized capable to give a contribution to the implementation of religious de-radicalization, the fact shows to what happened is the appearance of instructive relationship pattern, where the role of government is very dominant to Pondok pesantren by placing Pondok pesantren as the object of policy because it is assumed that Pondok pesantren is not capable to run the de-radicalization policies.

E. Conclusion
Based on data analysis, this study concluded that it is important to position all parties that involve in the religious de-radicalization policy by using a collaborative paradigm. The success of religious de-radicalization policies is influenced by the active role of other parties (non-government).
The domination of government in the religious de-radicalization program in Indonesia philosophically has injured the paradigm of governance in government administration and public policy. the instructive model as the implication of government domination kills local wisdom and other social potencies that are owned by Pondok pesantren either as educational institution entity or social community entity.
The Religious de-radicalization policy in Indonesia must be developed together by all stakeholders (the government and civil society) in one model of collaboration, not only as a form of cooperation or coordination.
It is not negotiable that the paradigm of public administration must be realized through the collaborative governance and conducted by formal institutional design in which Pondok pesantren involve directly as the subject of implementation, as well as developed in the consultative relationship model by placing the government as the holder of authority.