The decolonization of Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim country, was seen by up to half of the population as a religious struggle. Utilizing a combination of oral history and archival research, Kevin W. Fogg presents a new understanding of the Indonesian revolution and of Islam as a revolutionary ideology.

The Masyumi Party, which was active in Indonesia from 1945 to 1960, constitutes the boldest attempt to date at reconciling Islam and democracy. Masyumi proposed a vision of society and government which was not bound by a literalist application of Islamic doctrine but rather inspired by the values of Islam. It set out moderate policies which were both favourable to the West and tolerant towards other religious communities in Indonesia. Although the party made significant strides towards the elaboration of a Muslim democracy, its achievements were nonetheless precarious: it was eventually outlawed in 1960 for having resisted Sukarno’s slide towards authoritarianism, and the refusal of Suharto’s regime to reinstate the party left its leaders disenchanted and marginalised. Many of those leaders subsequently turned to a form of Islam known as integralism, a radical doctrine echoing certain characteristics of 19th-century Catholic integralism, which contributed to the advent of Muslim neo-fundamentalism in Indonesia. This book examines the Masyumi Party from its roots in early 20th-century Muslim reformism to its contemporary legacy, and offers a perspective on political Islam which provides an alternative to the more widely-studied model of Middle-Eastern Islam. The party’s experience teaches us much about the fine line separating a moderate form of Islam open to democracy and a certain degree of secularisation from the sort of religious intransigence which can threaten the country’s denominational coexistence.

Newly liberated from nearly four brutal years under Japanese control the people of Indonesia faced great uncertainty in October 1945. As the British Army attempted to take control of the city of Surabaya maintain order and deal with surrendered Japanese personnel their actions were interpreted by the young residents of Surabaya as a plan to restore Dutch colonial rule. In response the youth of the city seized Japanese arms and repelled the force sent to occupy the city. They then held off British reinforcements for two weeks battling tanks and heavy artillery with little more than light weapons and sheer audacity. Though eventually defeated Surabaya's defenders had set the stage for Indonesia's national revolution.

The Struggle of the Shi‘is in Indonesia is a pioneering work. It is the first comprehensive scholarly examination in English of the development of Shiism in Indonesia. It focuses primarily on the important period between 1979 and 2004 – a period of nearly a quarter of a century that saw the notable dissemination of Shi’i ideas and a considerable expansion of the number of Shi’i adherents in Indonesia. Since Islam in Indonesia is overwhelmingly Sunni, this development of Shiism in a predominantly Sunni context is a remarkable phenomenon that calls for careful, critical investigation. There is also an important examination of the principal ideas underlying the Madhab Ahl al-Bayt, the Imamate and Imam Madhi, Ja‘fari jurisprudence and ritual piety. Appropriately, in his discussion, Zulkifli provides a succinct outline of contrasts with Sunni ideas and practice. He also examines the publishing efforts that underpinned the dissemination of Shi’i ideas and the founding of IJABI (Ikatan Jamaah Ahlul Bait Indonesia) in July 2000 for the propagation of Ahl al-Bayt teachings. Given the Indonesian context, Zulkifli is also concerned with Sunni reactions to these Shi’i developments – a story that continues to unfold to the present. This book as a work of great value and significance for the continuing understanding of the richness and complexity of Indonesian Islam.

In Republicanism, Communism, Islam, John T. Sidel provides an alternate vantage point for understanding the variegated forms and trajectories of revolution across the Philippines, Indonesia, and Vietnam, a perspective that is de-nationalized, internationalized, and transnationalized. Sidel positions this new vantage point against the conventional framing of revolutions in modern Southeast Asian history in terms of a nationalist template, on the one hand, and distinctive local cultures and forms of consciousness, on the other. Sidel's comparative analysis shows how—in very different, decisive, and often surprising ways—the Philippine, Indonesian, and Vietnamese revolutions were informed, enabled, and impelled by diverse cosmopolitan connections and international conjunctures. Sidel addresses the role of Freemasonry in the making of the Philippine revolution, the importance of Communism and Islam in Indonesia's Revolusi, and the influence that shifting political currents in China and anticolonial movements in Africa had on Vietnamese revolutionaries. Through this assessment, Republicanism, Communism, and Islam tracks how these forces, rather than nationalism per se, shaped the forms of these revolutions, the ways in which they unfolded, and the legacies which they left in their wakes.

Mark R. Woodward’s Islam in Java: Normative Piety and Mysticism in the Sultanate of Yogyakarta (1989) was one of the most important work on Indonesian Islam of the era. This new volume, Java, Indonesia, and Islam, builds on the earlier study, but also goes beyond it in important ways. Written on the basis of Woodward’s thirty years of research on Javanese Islam in a Yogyakarta (south-central Java) setting, the book presents a much-needed collection of essays concerning Javanese Islamic texts, ritual, sacred space, situated in Javanese and Indonesian political contexts. With a number of entirely new essays as well as significantly revised versions of essays this book is a valuable contribution to the academic community by an eminent anthropologist and key authority on Islamic religion and culture in Java.

An important book that bridges the gap between the more specialist literature and the - often depressingly ill-informed - comments of journalists and ideologues. Merle Ricklefs Professor, Department of History, National University of Singapore --