In a fast-moving world, organizations that do not transform will be left behind. ICMI has all the prerequisites to remain relevant, but without concrete steps, it risks becoming merely a footnote in history.
AMIDST the increasingly complex socio-political dynamics of Indonesia, the existence of the Indonesian Association of Muslim Intellectuals (ICMI) is once again worth questioning: is it still relevant as an intellectual force for the ummah, or is it trapped in the romanticism of the past?
Founded in 1990 at the initiative of B. J. Habibie, ICMI was once a symbol of the Muslim intellectual awakening in the public sphere. At that time, this organization was not only a gathering place for Muslim intellectuals but also a bridge between the Muslim community and the state. During the New Order era, ICMI played a strategic role in opening up broader participation space for educated Muslim groups.
However, history never stands still. The 1998 Reformasi changed the landscape of power and opened up much wider spaces for freedom. Ironically, amidst that freedom, the echo of ICMI seems to have faded. No longer a central actor in national discourse, ICMI appears to have lost the momentum to redefine its role.
One fundamental issue is a crisis of positioning. In an era where the production of knowledge is no longer monopolized by formal organizations, the role of intellectuals has undergone a transformation. Social media, independent communities, and digital platforms have given birth to "new intellectuals" who are more fluid, more responsive, and often even more influential. In this regard, ICMI does not appear to have fully adapted. As reminded by Peter Drucker (1993), "the most valuable asset of a 21st-century institution will be its knowledge workers and their productivity." This statement confirms that intellectual-based organizations will only survive if they are able to continuously produce and manage knowledge.
Yet, the challenges facing the ummah and the nation today are increasingly complex. Issues such as social polarization, radicalism, economic inequality, and technological disruption require a clear, critical, and solution-oriented intellectual voice. This is where ICMI should take a strategic role: as a producer of ideas capable of influencing public policy, rather than just acting as a discussion forum. Nurcholish Madjid (1999) once asserted that "Islam is a religion that encourages renewal and openness to science." This spirit should be the foundation of ICMI's intellectual movement.
Unfortunately, a common criticism is that ICMI is now more often present in ceremonies than in substance. Its activities tend to be elitist and fail to touch upon the real problems of society. If this condition continues, the fear that ICMI will become merely a "nostalgia organization" is not an exaggeration.
Nevertheless, judging ICMI solely by its shortcomings is not entirely fair. The organization still possesses significant social capital in the form of an extensive national network, high-quality human resources, and strong historical legitimacy. Therefore, the question is not whether ICMI is still important, but whether it is capable of transformation.
That transformation requires at least three steps. First, a redefinition of its role. ICMI needs to step out of the shadows of the past and formulate a new vision relevant to contemporary challenges. Second, the revitalization of the intellectual movement. The production of ideas must be the top priority, not just ceremonial activities. Third, openness and inclusivity. In the era of collaboration, ICMI cannot walk alone; it must be able to network with various elements of society, including the younger generation.
Furthermore, ICMI also needs to be bolder in taking positions on strategic national issues. Excessive neutrality risks rendering it insignificant. As an organization of intellectuals, ICMI should be a moral force capable of providing constructive criticism of state policies while offering alternative solutions. B. J. Habibie (2006) once reminded us that "a nation that masters science and technology will be able to determine its own future." This idea confirms that national progress can only be achieved if the intellectual community carries out its strategic functions in a tangible way.
In this regard, the legacy of B. J. Habibie's thought is relevant to be revived. Habibie, besides building ICMI as an organization, also built it as a movement of thought oriented toward the advancement of science and technology, without losing the roots of Islamic spirituality. This value seems to be fading and needs to be revitalized.
In short, the future of ICMI depends heavily on its courage to change. In a fast-moving world, organizations that do not transform will be left behind. ICMI has all the prerequisites to remain relevant, but without concrete steps, it risks becoming merely a footnote in history.
The question now is simple yet fundamental: is ICMI ready to be an agent of change, or does it prefer to be a spectator?
Suprapto Estede, lecturer at Stiekia, advisor to ICMI Orda Bojonegoro.
Suprapto Estede, lecturer at Stiekia, advisor to ICMI Orda Bojonegoro.