The Yahukimo Conflict within the Ideal Narratives of Pancasila and Multiculturalism

The ideology of Pancasila is agreed upon to reconcile ethnic, religious, racial and intergroup diversity. However, tribal fanatism clashes in understanding inevitably lead to social conflicts, such as the tribal conflict in Yahukimo Papua. Based on this background, there are research questions, first, why do tribal social conflicts still exist in the Pancasila ideology state? How is Pancasila ideology able to be main foundation of the resolution of tribal social conflict? Methodo-logically, this paper is the result of literature study research. To explain the research questions, Bhikhu Parekh's theory of multiculturalism is used. In addition, the literature study method is used for data collection and the sociological approach for data analysis. The results of this study can be concluded that first, social conflicts with tribal nuances in the Pancasila ideological state will continue to have the potential to emerge when national identity is not maintained with a commitment to nationalism. Second, for this reason, the ideology of Pancasila in must continue to be carried out structurally and culturally for the resolution of tribal social conflicts. In the future, it is hoped that the Pancasila will ideally be embedded to strengthen national identity and unity.


Introduction
The disparities between community groups in Papua are caused by a variety of factors, such as geographical location (between coastal and highland), ethnic group (between Papuans or between Papuans and non-Papuans), gender (imbalance in power relations between women and men), etc. These horizontal imbalances or disparities between community groups should be taken into account in intervention strategies. The extent to which the international presence affects existing levels of difference (culturally, economically and socially); whether it increases or decreases differences. Appropriate consequence assessment of inequalities between societal groups should be developed in order to avoid mistakes in intervention strategies.
International agencies participate in building social capital by incorporating capacity building into every program, strengthening social cohesion, and finding common interests that bind the different major players in Papua. In this way, not only will the gaps in the divide between different groups of society decrease, but trust-building between different groups will also increase. Affirmative action is applied within the community and in the program management of international agencies, including for example in the selection of local partners for program implementation.
Ensuring equal opportunities for all local players, including NGOs with indigenous characteristics, is an example of affirmative action in program management. Large and well-known NGOs are usually based at the national or provincial level and have various opportunities to engage in the industry funder market; in contrast, some local initiatives or smaller NGOs have fewer opportunities. It is due to these smaller NGOs' lack of investment in capacity building. The level of achievement of intervention strategies should be critically examined; not just project-oriented success, but rather investment in developing and equipping local initiatives with the necessary managerial skills. The presence of international agencies must avoid industrializing or making social problems a commodity in the competition for projects among the various NGOs and international agencies working in Papua.
The paradigm should be shifted from project orientation to local ownership; international agencies should act as facilitators rather than actors. The job market within the funding industry must avoid a "brain drain" where human resources and knowledge are used to maintain inequitable conditions rather than reduce inequality gaps and increase opportunities for many layers to participate in social change. The "major" players of social change circulate only among a select few institutions or "activist elites". Thus, rather than managing existing inequalities between societal groups, the presence of international agencies triggers additional Conflict Analysis and Policy Recommendations on Papua 27 inequalities between institutions or actors. 300 of four tribes in the area, namely the Yali, Hubla, Kimyal and Momuna tribes. The boundaries of Yahukimo Regency are to the north bordering Jayawijaya Regency, Yalimo Regency and Keerom Regency.
Violent acts to tribal wars are often carried out as a form of problemsolving. For this reason, it is necessary to empower the government to the village level to open up space for conflict resolution, said Papuan researchers.
Dozens of people from the Kimyal Tribe attacked the Yali Tribe in homes, churches, and hotels on Sunday (04/10) in Dekai District, Yahukimo District. The attack left six people dead, 42 injured, thousands displaced, three houses and a hotel burned.
Warfa's anger was sparked by the death of former Yahukimo Regent Abock Busup in Jakarta, police said. Abock's death sparked the spread of false news from Jakarta to Yahukimo, that Abock was killed, and caused a number of people to move. The police have arrested 52 suspected of being the attack's perpetrators. Why is the classic conflict between ethnic groups prone to occur?
The conflict in Yahukimo, which is said to have been sparked by fake news, exposes the fact that there is no forum for resolving inter-ethnic disputes in Papua, said Papua Peace Network Coordinator Adriana Elisabeth. If a conflict occurs, Papua Peace Network Coordinator Adriana Elisabeth added there is a means of dialogue between village heads to gather and resolve problems.
"Empowerment must be carried out from the provincial, district/city levels, to villages that are the basis of tribes. The village head is responsible for preventing and overcoming inter-ethnic conflicts," Adriana said when contacted by a reporter for BBC News Indonesia, Monday (04/10).
"That space does not exist, so that in seeking justice for each tribe, violence is an option and is prone to occur. For that, there needs to be facilities, inter-ethnic representation, and the government is present." Adriana explained that every tribe in Papua has the same equality, even though they are a minority or a majority, plus a collectivity character in life. He said, "The collectivity is what causes them to be mobilized in large numbers, either to create or resolve conflicts." Another factor, this classic conflict, said Adriana, also cannot be separated from the nature of inter-tribal primordialism which has mutated from physical violence in the past to struggle for bureaucratic, economic and other positions.
"In Papua often times, if the regent is from tribe A, while the dominant tribe is B, there is a problem, the regent is accused of not paying attention to other tribes. Then, if tribe A leads, they will prioritize, lifting the bureaucracy from their tribe. This is also a trigger for conflict." "There is no formula for this harmonization of civilian leadership styles with tribal-based customs until now. This must be resolved to avoid gaps, disputes, and equalization of welfare." Similarly, the head of the Yahukimo Student Association in Jayapura, Yanis Soll, said that in Yahukimo there are 51 districts with dozens of tribes with diverse personality characteristics. He said, "The conflict occurs because of a lack of approach to the community, the absence of the value of togetherness and space for dialogue if inter-ethnic problems arise." In addition, another factor that makes conflict prone to occur is the lack of social welfare there, "The community has no guarantee of a comfortable life, plus a military approach." For this reason, Yanis asked the government to focus on building inter-tribal communication and welfare there. BBC News Indonesia has contacted the Provincial Government of Papua and the Papuan People's Council for a response but has not responded until this news is published.
As a social ethic, the ideology of Pancasila was able to suppress the ideology of dialectical materialism (Marxism-Leninism) in the Madiun Rebellion in 1948. It also calmed the theocratic ideology that aspires to an Islamic state in the DI/TII rebellion. Dissatisfaction with the elected power often re-imagines the idea of the Jakarta Charter proposal on the Pancasila ideology, which provides for the obligation to carry out Islamic law. In fact, since 1983 Pancasila was agreed as the only principle in sociopolitical life. The agreement on the principle of Pancasila is regulated by Law Number 3 of 1985 concerning Political Parties and Law Number 8 of 1985 concerning Social Organizations. Therefore, it is emphasized that ideology is the principle to underlie the behavior of a person, group, community, or nation in social and state life. In fact, it is often used to justify power (Poespowardojo, 1991, p. 179).
Husein Muslim's research asserts that Pancasila as a social ethic is ideally still far from expectations. It institutionally can not change the turmoil of political, economic, and cultural realms. Many state administrators, law enforcers, and political elites have been proven to have committed corruption. His research investigated the effectiveness of the Presidential Working Unit for strengthening the Pancasila Ideology (UKP PIP) and Government Regulation in Law Number 2 of 2017 concerning Social Organizations. The regulation is an effort by the government to prevent organizations that would undermine values. Pancasila values (Muslimin, 2016). In addition, the existence of social conflicts with religious nuances, in Anis Maryuni Ardi's research, is caused by the lack of populism in the use of Pancasila values as conflict resolution. Disputes with religious or moral nuances involving identity have not been resolved using Pancasila values. Anis Maryuni Ardi gives an example that the wisdom in interfaith dialogue, social justice (distributive justice), and just and civilized humanity are carried out only in their formal ways. Yet, they do not touch the issues substantively so that the actualization of Pancasila values in action is not stressed on. In fact, the research has observed that Pancasila is yet to be viewed as a national metanarrative for a conflict resolution (Ardi, 2017).
This research uses the literature study method and the sociological approach of religious life. The literature study method is used to collect ideas, concepts and phenomena of facticity about the problems of this research. The aims of the literature study method are: 1) to observe current research developments that are relevant to the problem. Then, determine the positioning of this research in the constellation of the development of contemporary philosophical thought. 2) To identify figures, works, theories and findings relevant to the problem. Inherently, the identification of a philosopher, sociologist, historian, or anthropologist is explained in the use of his theories. 3) To identify differences in thinking that develop regarding problems in the approach of social philosophy (Bhattacherjee, 2012, p. 21).
The concept of critique is an essential feature of this tradition as a whole and of its distinctiveness. For one thing, it means not simply an act of judgment or resistance, but also a specific way of relating to the world, a way that any subject relates to an object. This is because critique is a means to relate what is perceived in everyday life with a deeper, more rational knowledge that world. The concept of a critical theory of society maintains that any valid, true form of knowledge about society and its products is aware not only of the object of consciousness and its various dynamics, but also of the subjective factors of cognition that determine the knowledge of that object. Therefore, a critical theory of society is set with the task of uncovering the social conditions under which knowledge about itself is articulated, since the way we comprehend the objective world is related to how we conceive of ourselves. At the same time, it was a form of thinking that is designed not only to comprehend, but also to transform: its purpose is to change not only our knowledge of the objective world-of society, of institutions, of culture, and so on-but simultaneously the nature of the subject in a practical sense (Thompson, 2017, pp. 1-2).

Yahukimo's Conflict and Chronology
The incident began when the Kimyal tribe allegedly attacked the Yali tribe. A number of houses and hotels were burned down. The Kimyal people also carry traditional tools such as arrows, machetes, and other sharp tools when attacking.
The Yahukimo riots were triggered by the sensitive issue of the death of former Yahukimo Regent Abock Busup. The information was sourced by Head of the Public Information Bureau of the Public Relations Division of the National Police Headquarters Brigadier General Rusdi Hartono at his office, South Jakarta on Monday, October 4, 2021. Vol. 29 No. 2 (2021) 304

MASYKUR MASYKUR
Abock is known to have ended his position as regent in April 2021. Apart from being a regent, he is also the Chairman of the DPW of the National Mandate Party (PAN) in Papua. On October 3, 2021, Abock was found unconscious in a room at the Grand Mercure Hotel, Central Jakarta. A hotel clerk named Taufik Ismail knocked on the door of room 1707 occupied by Abock Busup.
Because he did not get an answer, the hotel clerk then told his coworker Ridwan, and reported that there was no response from room 1707. Therefore, the two hotel employees conveyed this to Abock Busup's colleague who was staying in room 1725, Yipwa. Subsequently, the two hotel employees and Yipwa entered Abock's room. Inside, Abock was found dead. "When the room door was opened, the victim on behalf of Abock Busup was found dead," said Rusdi.
So by hotel staff, Abock was taken to Meilia Cibubur Hospital. "From the doctor's statement, it was found that the statement was death on arrival. No signs of violence or other drugs were found," said Rusdi. The police and hospital also contacted Abock's family. They offered Abock's family to take the autopsy step. However, the autopsy request was rejected. On the other hand, the police said the family had accepted the death of Abock Busup as fate. The body was flown the same day to Jayapura using a Garuda plane.
Even so, the police said they were still investigating the cause of Abock's death for clarity. Rusdi said negative issues were circulating in Yahukimo, which triggered the Kimyal tribe to attack the Yali tribe. The issues of clashes or church attacks are spreading because of the death of Abock Busup. Maybe some issues are not true, his death was due to something out of the ordinary, maybe that is developing. But, the riots had already happened. Head of Public Relations of the Papua Regional Police Commissioner Ahmad Musthofa Kamal said that six victims were declared dead, one of whom was the perpetrator. Meanwhile, 41 other victims are still receiving medical treatment at Yahukimo Hospital. Kamal also stated that 52 suspected perpetrators had been arrested and were still being questioned by investigators. The trigger for the attack was allegedly the sad news the Kimyal Tribe community received over the death of former Yahukimo Regent Abock Busup M.A. (Pebrianto, 2021).

Yahukimo's Tribal Conflicts: An Encounter toward Understanding a Social Conflict
To define the nature of Yahukimo's tribal conflicts, we should take concern conceptually that conflict is defined as a disturbance of the mind, the sine qua non of reflection and ingenuity (Dewey, 1922); (Coser, 1957).
In the social realm, conflict is indicated by actions that disturb the mind, such as hitting other people, berating others, or thinking badly of others. The term "conflict" itself comes from the Latin conflictus which means "to attack together", or confligere which means "to attack together". On the basis of the origin of the language, the definition explains that social conflict is a matter of individual morality who experiences mental disorders with other people in community life, for example the existential doubts of a person adhering to a religion in a society of a different religion, or the anxiety of a person's social behavior in society. who have a view of traditional culture but themselves have a religious view. There are many meanings in understanding conflict which is influenced by one's intentions in their respective disciplines. In the phenomenology of religious life, conflict is referred to as the "strange association" of various social relations in factual life experiences or busy activities. The mixing brought about by fear, desire, and lust brings about a new conflict within itself. This conflict will be the basis of the behavior of someone who is antithetical to dialectical, intolerant (Heidegger, 2004).
In the realm of philosophy, thoughts about conflict can be traced to the writings of ancient philosophers, such as Plato, Thucydides, Niccolò Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes. Furthermore, the modern philosopher that many social thinkers refer to is Marx. The emphasis of Marx and Engels in explaining the basis of conflict is material conditions, such as class conflict which is based on property relations. However, social philosophers widely criticized Marx's thinking in the 1960s, especially in English-speaking countries. Dahrendorf criticizes that power relations underlie social conflict, not property relations. Antonio Gramsci emphasizes that cultural hegemony in the ruling class is a form of domination which underlies social conflicts (Kuper & Kuper, 2000).
On the other hand, in the sociological realm, conflict is understood positively constructively that it not only produces new norms and new institutions, it even encourages direct developments in the economic and technological fields (Coser, 1957). For example, conflict not only creates the United Nations institutions that deploy peacekeeping missions, but also reproduces the constant reproduction of advanced atomic and nuclear weapons. In addition, conflict is understood to be negatively destructive of being based on fundamental inequalities of social structure. In other words, social conflict is an imbalance of power and authority that might include social organizations (Dahrendorf, 1958). Given this inequality, conflict is understood as a form of coercion, including violence, as the main way to create control, even though it recognizes the existence of symbols in conflict, both at the individual and social structural levels (Kuper & Kuper, 2000).
Understanding the Indonesian constitution as the context by which social conflicts may occur is vital. In the state constitution, the definition of conflict is "a feud and/or physical clash with violence between two or more community groups that lasts for a certain time and has a broad impact that results in insecurity and social disintegration so as to disrupt national stability and hinder national development" (Acts No. 7, 2012). In a constitutional understanding, conflict is indicated by a social process in two or more communal communities that begins with a violent clash, results in insecurity and social disintegration, and disrupts national stability and obstacles to national development. Therefore, social conflict within the state is a disturbance of national stability and an obstacle to national development produced by clashes with inter-community violence.
Criticism of the concept of "humans as creatures in conflict" is understood by the existence of human existential heteronomy. Existential heteronomy opens the bonds of human existential dichotomy that has been shackled in conflict. Existential heteronomy appears based on social differences. Social differences cannot avoid different moral and cultural views. The conception is not only based on social reality in which humans are natural beings and at the same time, social beings, but humans as religious beings.
The existence of religious and ethnic forces embedded in a multicultural society, the essential source of conflict is the existential heteronomy of humans in social life. The essential source of conflict is a philosophical reflection on humans as creatures in conflict. However, human characteristics are rarely found as a source of social conflict, but in general social scientists say that the source of social conflict is social, political and economic relations. However, in state regulations it is explained that social conflicts are explained as originating from: 1) problems related to politics, economy, and socio-culture; 2) inter-religious and/or inter-religious, inter-ethnic, and inter-ethnic conflicts (Law Number 7, 2012).
The Indonesian state regulations respond to human existence in interreligious and inter-ethnic conflicts. There are three sources of conflict. First, economic conflict involves the motive of competition to achieve scarce resources. Second, value conflicts involve incompatibility in the way of life, ideology as preferences, principles, and belief practices. Third, power conflict occurs when each party wants to maintain or maximize the amount of influence it exerts in social relations and arrangements (Fisher, 2000). Value conflict as a source of conflict emphasizes that conflict is based on the existence of religious and ethnic people.
With that thought and regulation, conflict resolution is offered in two ways: peace or coercion. Coercion in the form of physical, spiritual and social has to be banned by any means for example hitting each other, threatening each other not to have an opinion, and forcing each other to expel from their homes. However, the conflict resolution offered is dichotomous. The dichotomy in conflict resolution stems from the final goal of a conflict that is found, namely justice or injustice, and truth or falsehood. If the choice is a fight, it means an act that is degrading to a subhuman level. Also, it means all parties involved in achieving their goals with who wins or is the strongest, regardless of human dignity (will, autonomy) on the other side (Magnis-Suseno, 1999).
Based on Hegel's formal analysis, the outcome of the conflict described in the human concept is that "it must always end in the death (or incapacitation) of one party. Meanwhile, if it does not end in the death of one party, it will inevitably create a new power relationship." The outcome is due to a defined and sustained interaction with a victor's threat. Therefore, without acquittal or coercion, conflict will inevitably only reproduce new conflicts as bad solutions (Magnis-Suseno, 1999).

Looking for the Ideal: Yahukimo's Conflict within Intercultural and Multiculturalism
Conflict resolution should also based on intercultural dialogue as a prerequisite for realizing the social order of a multicultural society. Intercultural dialogue is ontologically attached to diverse ethnic groups, religions, races and groups. Dialogue in Gadamer's thinking is "a conversation". To be in a conversation, however, means to be outside of oneself, to think with others, and to return to oneself as if to another" (Gadamer, 1989, p. 110). Conversation occurs on the condition that dialogue is fulfilled if someone participates in managing conflict in public life.
Mutual questions and answers support conversations in intercultural dialogue. Conversations are made to avoid prejudice. In the conversation, each participant speaks the public language. The spirit of dialogue is to strengthen the arguments of others, not to win over the boundaries of the discussion. Gadamer emphasized that "understanding in dialogue is not a method or something abstract, but a mode of being" (mode of being). Therefore, dialogue is a direct understanding in which each individual brings a horizon "about a vision that includes everything that can be seen from a certain point of view". Words in dialogue indicate thoughts associated with finite determination (Marshall, 2004).
The state in the process of intercultural dialogue only acts as a facilitator or mediator in conflict resolution. Peace in social conflicts results in declarations of peace. However, peace dialogue is not participatory, because local communities are neglected in the peace planning and implementation process, only as objects of physical recovery, reconstruction, and recipients of emergency assistance for refugees (Buchanan, 2011). In other words, so far, the dialogue in the peace declaration is a discriminatory and hegemonic dialogue in which there is an act of neglecting different social identities in a multicultural society.
Such an act of peace should only be right if it is based on justice. Plato said that "justice is the basic norm of the legitimacy of a social order, in which the rights of every human being are guaranteed". However, the existence of discrimination and state hegemony shows the existence of a structure of injustice in a multicultural society (Magnis-Suseno, 1999).
Intercultural dialogue as a peacemaker is the key to cases of past conflicts. Peace is based on pardoning the nation for past serious crimes. Forgiveness is known as amnesty. However, the government also did not simply forget the past. Peace is limited to providing designs for saving the nation's future or non-prosecution. The first target of peace is not to seek justice, but rather to "save a more just and prosperous future for future generations of the nation". As said by Jusuf Kalla, the Vice President of the Republic of Indonesia at a meeting with the Indonesian people in South Africa on September 24, 2005 that: "the spirit is to forgive each other, but not to forget, forgiven but not forgetten. It means, something that has happened is let go, let's look to the future, with the past as a lesson" (Lebang, 2007).
Intercultural dialogue is still needed to prevent terrorism as extraordinarily criminal violence in this legal and multicultural country. The violence of terrorism can be seen in the suicide bombings which resulted in many victims of humanity, whether afraid, injured or lost their lives. The act of suicide bombing represents the belief in the moral monism of an individual who sacrifices several lives for others. This act is truly extraordinarily criminal violence in the life of a society that adheres to the Pancasila ideology and the principle of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. Therefore, non-violence in Gandhi's thought can explain the violent acts of suicide bombing committed by terrorists in a multicultural society. "Non-violent actions position moderation between Muslims and Christians who often commit extraordinarily criminal acts of violence." Non-violence is a theory of Gandhi's ahimsa as the theology of nonviolence in Hinduism. This theory of non-violence explains that "the universe is generally taken to be eternal, and so the question of creation never dominates the Hindu mind. It is pervasive, structured and governed by various cosmic forces described, generally understood not as a static substance but as an active principle that informs or 'flows through' everything in the universe and manifests itself in different forms in different species of beings (Parekh, 1989). With this theory, all humans embody cosmic forces; they are not only the same or brothers but one. At different levels, all life is one, at the highest level all creation is pervaded with the divine and, therefore, one.
The traditional conception of non-violence as intercultural dialogue in conflict resolution is deepened in the analysis of the theology of nonviolence. According to Gandhi, "the religion of non-violence is not meant solely for sages and saints. It is meant for ordinary people too" (Parekh, 1989). Non-violence is obligatory on all, not just the hermits, and calls it a religion. Therefore, religion for him is a way of life that involves a total transformation of all human relations, its response has a radical social impetus. He observed that "respect must not be a passive spirituality that spends itself in idle meditation, but must be an active thing that will bring war to the enemy camp" (Parekh, 1989).
In addition, the resolution of conflicts over religious nuances based on religious moderation is based on the social recognition of multicultural society which is shown in the form of respect and equal treatment of marginalized and demeaned identities. More profoundly, Taylor asserts that "recognition is generally built on socially derived identities based on the fact that it is based on social categories that everyone takes for granted" (Taylor, 1992). Socially derived identity means identity that depends on society, so it is called social recognition. For this reason, social recognition involves the state as a political community, society as a social community, and individuals as citizens.
After intercultural dialogue is carried out, but misrecognition occurs towards marginalized and demeaned identities, then misrecognition is not only a lack of respect, it can cause painful wounds, burden the victim by paralyzing self-hatred. Social recognition is really a human need that determines life and death. Social recognition should be done in two ways: 1) First, respect. Respect for an individual by giving him some public honors, because not everyone has them. Intrinsic respect for choice. With that respect, one's choice is again owned. 2) Second, equal treatment. Equality to an individual in public life to maintain the rights of all human beings. With this equality, one's dignity is respected (Taylor, 1992). In addition, social recognition needs to be followed by social movements, such as anti-discrimination, culturally sensitive interpretation and application of laws, liberation from certain rules and practices, application of community sensitive public policies, additional rights and resources, encouraging public respect for marginalized identities, ensuring adequate representation in public institutions, and acknowledging the presence of marginalized communities in the definition of national identity (Parekh, 2008). State recognition of the Ahmadiyah congregation or other marginalized communities within the national identity needs to be carried out as a form of equal treatment.
This social recognition should be accompanied by redistribution, especially referring to material resources that can continue equality. Redistribution can enable marginalized cultural communities to lead decent lives without radically reducing inequalities in all areas of life (Parekh, 2004). Such redistribution is closely related to social recognition to create a collective identity. Redistribution facilitates social recognition, not only for respect, but also for equality of living together. On the other hand, identity recognition broadens the notion of social solidarity by including marginalized and denigrated cultural communities into shared collective identities and helping redistribution, not only to respect, but also to maintain freedom and diversity. Empirically and normatively, the relationship between recognition and redistribution can provide justice for social welfare (Parekh, 2008).
Social recognition substantively emphasizes the existence of a "collective identity" in which the more cultural communities participate in, the more they assert their historically inherited identities in the name of authenticity and freedom (Parekh, 2008). This collective identity can be treated in national identity (nationalism). Like individual identity, national identity is more than that. It is complex, multilayered, and composed of different and often conflicted thoughts, behavior patterns, values , and ideals accumulated over centuries. The complexity of national identities has its advantages and disadvantages. Its advantages are historical records, public debates, and institutional articulations. The disadvantages are a melting pot of people, a long past, dominant interests, and ideological manipulation. On that basis, Parekh defines national identity as "a political community that has a certain history, traditions, beliefs, character qualities, and historical memory, which limits various alternatives to open it." From this understanding, national identity is not a fact of life that is primordial, crude and unchangeable, and passively inherited by every generation. Therefore, national identity is not a substance but a cluster of interrelated intentions that often pull in different directions. Each generation has to identify values and ideals that are never transparent and unambiguous (Parekh, 2008). National identity in practice, is a term used in two related but different meanings, i.e., individual identity and national identity. Individual identity refers to "members of the political community as distinct from other types of community", whereas national identity refers to "the identity of the political community" (Parekh, 2008). For example, Indonesians are a national identity, Christians or Bantenese are individual religious or ethnic identities, while Indonesians are a political community more than anything else Social recognition in religious moderation above is the center of individual identity and self-worth in social, political, and economical construction. In fact, without social recognition, both can be damaged. Therefore, it is believed that "no multicultural society can be stable and vibrant, except to ensure that its constituent societies accept both only by recognizing and sharing economic and political power" (Parekh, 2000). Thus, to understand social conflict filled with violent behavior, it must be said that "rather than asking when violence is justified, we should ask when non-violent violations might be condoned" (Parekh, 1989). Forgiving violent behavior by eliminating the human soul only takes respect for human dignity and worth. Social recognition based on religious moderation carried out in a multicultural society reflects the nature of humans as creatures of dialogue. Without social recognition, dialogue is only human existential falsification in social conflict.
In addition, Bhikhu Parekh's multiculturalism is the theoretical framework in this research. Parekh understands multiculturalism in his work as a perspective on human life, not a political doctrine that contains philosophical theories about humans and world" (Parekh, 2000). Although he admits it is not a political doctrine or a philosophical theory, Parekh explains multiculturalism philosophically which is based on several philosophers' thoughts, including Gadamer and Taylor. Theoretically, Parekh's multiculturalism is a critical review of the political philosopher of cultural pluralism and his report on culture, human values, and the meaning of justice and equality in a multicultural society. Parekh's multiculturalism reaches a rare and impressive level of theoretical coherence and depth of insight.

Multiculturalism for Solving Tribal Issues
Multicultural is a descriptive term to characterize the fact of cultural diversity in society. The term "culture" refers to cultural diversity as a system, such as beliefs and practices. By embedding culture in human activities and relations, culture becomes the center of attention of religion and ethnicity. The relationship between culture and religion is closely related. Culture and religion influence each other on various levels. Culture can influence how religion is interpreted, rituals are performed, and places of worship are established in social life. On the other hand, religion can construct belief systems and practices in culture when individuals or communities change their religion, their way of thinking and their lives will undergo important changes. Therefore, why do individuals change religions to bring their culture into their new religion, such as the differences between individual Muslims in Indonesia, India, Iran, and Algeria, or Christianity in China, Egypt, and America. From the reality of the relation between religion and culture, no religion is "culturefree" and God's will cannot obtain a predetermined human meaning without "cultural mediation". In Christianity it is believed that Christ is God, but the certainty of Christianity (Christianity) is a cultural phenomenon (Parekh, 2000). Likewise, ethnicity is a cultural phenomenon. Ethnic communities have a system of beliefs and practices that are embodied in customs, rituals, and cultural celebrations, for example the Bugis, Buton, Makassar and other ethnic groups. Bugis ethnicity, for example, is a factual cultural phenomenon that brings together and influences each other between religion and ethnicity where culture is a mediator. Thus, moral and cultural diversity is a cultural facticity in a multicultural society.
There are four philosophical arguments for moral and cultural diversity based on the reality of the diversity of moral and cultural views. First, moral and cultural diversity can "increase the range of options available and expand freedom of choice." It is important but limiting, because judging other cultures as potential objects of choice does not respect realistic cultures, such as indigenous peoples, ethnic communities, the Ahmadiyya community. Second, cultural diversity is "an inevitable and legitimate outcome of the exercise of rights" (Parekh, 2000). With diversity being unavoidable, society must create conducive conditions, it is not enough just to give legal rights to culture, such as respecting differences, maintaining minority self-confidence, and providing additional resources to those in need.
Third, cultural diversity can "create a world that is rich, varied, and aesthetically pleasing and stimulating". However, diversity based on aesthetics does not ensure a uniform moral and social world, even between the two often conflicts. Fourth, cultural diversity can "encourage healthy competition between different systems of ideas and ways of life, both preventing the dominance of one and facilitating new truths to emerge". However, competition in individuality and progressivity is based on human superiority, but is instrumental and does not appreciate intrinsic values, such as not being able to defend the rights of indigenous peoples, the Ahmadiyya community, orthodox religious communities, and others to discover new truths (Parekh, 2000).
The philosophical argument for moral and cultural diversity explains that different morals and cultures improve and complement each other regarding new forms of human fulfillment, such as harmony with nature, a sense of ecological balance, contentment, honesty, and simplicity. In that context, moral and cultural diversity is the determinant and condition of human freedom. In addition, moral and cultural diversity makes people aware of their moral and cultural diversity, such as encouraging internal cultural dialogue, creating a space for critical and independent thinking, and maintaining experimental abilities. On the other hand, a homogeneous culture or religion will erase differences and give rise to internal ambiguity. Therefore, moral and cultural diversity creates a climate of mutually beneficial dialogue (Parekh, 2000).
Thus, multiculturalism in religious moderation is not committed to the view that "only a culturally open way of life is best", but recognizes that "a good life can lead to several different ways, including being culturally independent and finding a second space". However, if others are considered equal, then "an open and culturally different way of religious life is better than a culturally independent way of religious life" (Parekh, 2000). Based on equality, religious moderation in a multicultural society requires an argument for justice because it is impossible for the majority community to accept the obligation of justice to the minority community without the belief that the majority community will gain something in the process (Ejobowah & Kymlicka, 1997).

Conclusion
The results of the study of Yahukimo's Tribal conflict indicate that social conflicts with a tribal nuance within the auspices of the Pancasila ideology will continue to have the potential to emerge. In that context, religious moderation, which since 2019 has been carried out by the Ministry of Religion of the Republic of Indonesia as the leading sector, has continuously spread the views, attitudes and behavior of moderate religious people (wasaṭiyyah) in the niches of national and state life. The thoughts of the religious moderation movement as a resolution of conflicts over religious nuances are discussed below.
From the discussion of the research results, it can be concluded that conflicts over religious nuances within the auspices of the Pancasila ideology will potentially continue to emerge when national identity is not treated with collective or national identity. Second, religious moderation is very much needed to prevent extremist ideology from being developed by various acts of violence and terror in Indonesia, only for the sake of power. Third, for this reason, Pancasila's ideology in religious moderation must continue to be carried out, both structurally and culturally, to resolve social conflicts over religious nuances based on intercultural dialogue and social recognition. From this paper, it is hoped that the Pancasila ideology based on religious moderation will continue to be massively mobilized to strengthen national identity and the spirit of nationalism. [w]