By: Otjih Sewandarijatun, Researcher at the Center of Strategic Intelligence Risk Assessment (Cersia)

Indeed, there are pros and cons related to understanding and standardization of radicalism. In a public discussion, movement leaders of Islamic organizations who rated society radically mention it considered there should be standardization of radicalism, so an organization said to be radical if it exceeds the standards of radicalism, as in Indonesia we judge had no one on terrorism, and that more people Muslims who are victims of terrorism charges.

"It's unfair if our organization is said to be movement or the radical mass organization members of the organization because we never killed. Our actions so far only conducted operations against memaksiatan escapes eradication of apparatus, "he said, adding that the organization we love the Homeland and even the High Priest us before making the lecture sing Indonesia Raya, so and clear organization did not disperse study conducted by fellow Muslims.

However, in some areas many CSOs who commit violence and even murder but why not be regarded as a terrorist. While one of the figures Organizations youth under NU mention, what the radicals are acts that violate the laws valid in a country, as do sweping at the mall, go to discotheques, to close the diner wishes, it must realize that this country already there are forces ready to enforce the law.

"What FPI do is a provocative act, what happens in Jakarta do not carry to East Java, what happened in Jakarta finish in Jakarta, because East Java is secure, do not contrived heat because of the problems of other regions," he said adding that we must remain committed, that the state of Indonesia from the very beginning of independence is Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution, from the beginning of the Indonesian nation has promised us that we live together in diversity in the Homeland frame with based on Pancasila.

According to him, the state must be present to counter radicalism, because Ansor judge that radicalism has been ingrained in people's minds. The most core we must keep the commitments which had been agreed with the predecessor of the nation. This nation is a joint investment, there should be a dialogue in case problems do not win alone and there must be good communication, do not bring the issues that is not important to rupture.

Radicals emerged in Indonesia because there is one group that felt most truly themselves, while others are under and to be false. Radicalism arises because there is a group that Mersa himself to be the most wins and most powerful of the other groups do not accept equality and diversity.

However, what happens when this happens because of the political movement, let us bring to ourselves that we should still respect the diversity that exists in Indonesia.

The emergence of the present difficulties and radicalism bit much due to amendments made to the 1945 Constitution, all levels of society and government should be aware of each other and and back at the crowd that had been ingrained in the nation of Indonesia.

Many people judge, the Indonesian nation as it is today as a result of the 1945 amendment and the abolish of the Guidelines, with the amendment becomes chaotic state of each is only concerned with their own interests for the benefit of groups, from which comes the seeds - the seeds of radicalism.

So the concept of the amendment should be reviewed and returned in 1945, because after that the concept of 1945 is the work of the nation’s most powerful ever.

Recognized or not, the Indonesian state has been compromised by liberalism system and capitalism, with the election to seek win a victory but the impact on the disintegration, loss of Diversity is the value of the noble nation of Indonesia.

Comprehensive Strategy

To ward off the radicalism that is currently based BNPT that radicalism was there, there should be dialogue between religious leaders, and more importantly there to counteract that we have to go back into the 1945 Constitution and Pancasila.

To counteract radicalism, there must be dialogue and consultations based on the values ​​- noble values ​​that have been instilled by pendahu - the predecessor of the nation. How in the days of the struggle Diversity can run various elements in it.

Besides, it should be planted right on the noble values ​​of Pancasila which inibtelah started to fade, education factor is crucial to countering radicalism, teachers and parents are actively supported by the government giving out a good understanding for the younger generation about the diversity of the virtues Indonesian nation.

The other thing is early to be instilled values ​​of Pancasila, must be implanted role model the values ​​of a good foundation, not only to counter radicalism was that there should be dialogue between religious leaders, in order to create good communication.

Not only that, the most important for countering radicalism is fairness and impartial law enforcement should be done by the government and the country, related to the differences that give rise to radicalism dialogue and courage to communicate to parse each nation's problems.

Last but not least, a comprehensive strategy to ward off the radical movement is to do a massive de-radicalization and intense. Why de-radicalization? Deradicalisation be a method widely discussed in the discourse of counter-terrorism. Nothing or no consensus of experts on the definition of de-radicalization. But the RAND corporation's approach in defining both interesting and important to be a reference. According to the RAND Corporation in http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2010/RAND_MG1053.pdf, page xiii, "Deradicalisation is the process of changing an invidual beliefs system, Rejecting the extremist ideology, and embracing the mainstream values".

In a simplified description, the de-radicalization is an attempt to change the ideology, thinking and understanding person who originally became more radical disengagement radikal.Sedangkan more to the process of opening up space for a person's behavior changes to reject violence, avoid or stop the radicals although there is stillrecognize as radical understanding in mind.

Deradicalisation can be understood either ideologically or behavior, Omar Ashour (2008) in his article defines the concept of de-radicalization as a process that directs individual or group to change its behavior related to violence - particularly on the violence against civilians. The results of the ideological de-radicalization can be seen from the change in the way the individual, while emphasizing the de-radicalization of behavior change in the aspect of individual action.

Ashour also explains explain the phenomenon of de-radicalization organizational group level, and if the de-radicalization process is successful it will affect the whole group distanced from acts of terrorism, ideally this strategy will succeed if the main group does not produce a more radical splinter group. As an example of organizational de-radicalization is a group that was categorized as a terrorist group (Palestine Liberation Organization and South Africa - Africa National Congress) and militias (Amal group in Lebanon).

On the other side Renee Garfinkel (2007) argues that the de-radicalization has in common with spiritual experience, similar to religious conversion, as happened in the process of radicalization. In contrast to the experience of radicalization, de-radicalization of individuals who have not adopted the new ideology as a function of their participation in the support group.

The decision to perform the de-radicalization is usually an individual decision, then the individual is isolated from social groups. Relationships with role models (rolemodel) are seen as important in distancing the individual from a radical viewpoint. One similarity the process of de-radicalization with the process of radicalization is the traumatic experience of the people before making a decision to carry out disengagement. Trauma act as the event that triggered the transformation of an individual's belief.

Tore Bjorgo (2006) distinguishes between push and pull factors driving factors that influence an individual's decision to abandon the radical group. The driving factor is a negative element or the social forces that make it unattractive to continue membership in a particular organization. These factors also include criminal charges, denial of family or community or acts of violence from opposition groups. Pull factor is the power of chance or social appeal that makes people look for alternatives other, more promising life. This includes "the individual's desire to live freely in a normal life", a new job or educational opportunities that could be disrupted if the individual membership in terrorist groups known to the public, or the desire to form a family and take on roles and responsibilities as a parent and spouse life as one of the strongest motives for leaving the militant group.