The important lesson is that managing the Ahmadiyah issue is not enough by relying solely on social tolerance or inclusive policies, but also requires collective awareness that conflicts based on religious identity can always be reactivated by political dynamics.
January 30, 2026
In public discourse, tolerance is often understood as the absence of conflict. Regions deemed tolerant are often assumed to be safe from identity-based friction, especially involving minority groups. However, Wonosobo’s experience demonstrates the opposite: tolerance does not always mean the absence of conflict, but often simply changes its form.
The Ahmadiyah case in Wonosobo provides an important lesson that minority conflicts can arise, even in areas with relatively high levels of social tolerance. These conflicts do not erupt in physical violence, but rather manifest as tensions that can flare up at any time when triggered by policies, media representation, or identity dynamics.
Unlike many other regions in Indonesia, the Ahmadiyya conflict in Wonosobo, around 2013, when persecution of the Ahmadiyya group was at its peak nationally, did not follow the typical pattern of conflict between Ahmadiyya and mainstream Islam. There were no expulsions, attacks, or open persecution. However, this does not mean that conflict did not exist. In Wonosobo, the conflict actually occurred within the Ahmadiyya community itself
There are two Ahmadiyya groups in this region: the Qadiani Ahmadiyya and the Lahore Ahmadiyya. Nationally, the Qadiani Ahmadiyya are better known for their theological differences with mainstream Islam, particularly regarding the status of the Prophet Muhammad, and have therefore been frequently targeted for violence. In contrast, the Lahore Ahmadiyya have been relatively unaffected by similar pressures, as they theologically identify with mainstream Islam.
Historically, Wonosobo has been the traditional stronghold of the Ahmadiyya Lahore community. This group has long been integrated into local social life. These established social relations have created a dominant position for the Ahmadiyya Lahore community as an established group within the local community.
The situation began to change when the Qadiani Ahmadiyah arrived as a new group. The conflict that arose was not simply a matter of theological differences, but rather a competition for identity and legitimacy: who had the right to represent the “Ahmadiyah” identity. Tensions intensified as both groups used the same identity name without clear distinctions, whether in social practices, local government policies, or media coverage.
In this context, the Wonosobo regional government’s policies are crucial. Under the leadership of then-Regent Abdul Kholiq Arif, the local government adopted an inclusive approach by not enforcing the Joint Decree of the Three Ministers on Ahmadiyah, unlike many other regions in Indonesia. This policy aimed to protect vulnerable groups and prevent violence against Ahmadiyah, particularly Qadiani Ahmadiyah.
source and more….
Categories: Ahmadis, Ahmadiyyat: True Islam, Asia, Indonesia, Interfaith tolerance, Intolerance, Tolerance
1 reply ›