- An Indonesian analyst urged Jakarta to scrutinize any involvement in the Trump-linked Board of Peace, warning it could affect the country’s free-and-active foreign policy principles.
- The analyst said participation in geopolitical forums can be read as symbolic endorsement, making clarity of position and contribution essential.
- He stressed Indonesia must ensure “peace” efforts align with justice, sovereignty and international law, citing Indonesia’s long-held stance including on Palestine.
Indonesia’s involvement in a proposed Board of Peace established by United States President Donald Trump should be closely scrutinized, according to intelligence, defense and security analyst Ngasiman Djoyonegoro.
He said the move touches on the consistency of Indonesia’s foundational diplomatic values in pursuing a just and dignified world peace.
“Since the early days of independence, Indonesia has treated its free-and-active foreign policy not only as a strategy, but also as a moral stance in responding to global dynamics that are often marked by tension, dominance and the use of force,” said the analyst, who goes by the nickname Simon, in a statement issued in Jakarta on Tuesday.
He added that the principle has become a key foundation for determining Indonesia’s position in various international forums.
Simon argued that the Board of Peace should not be viewed simply as a fully neutral peace forum. He stressed that every global initiative emerges within a political context and reflects particular strategic interests.
In international relations practice, a country’s presence is often interpreted as a form of symbolic approval of a forum’s agenda.
“Indonesia needs to realize that participation, even when intended for positive goals, can still be interpreted as moral legitimacy,” Simon said.
He warned that the free-and-active foreign policy risks losing its substance if Indonesia attends international forums without a clear position.
According to him, free-and-active does not mean unlimited flexibility, but rather the ability to maintain independence and the courage to voice objections when peace and justice risk being sidelined.
“Active diplomacy must begin with an independent stance, not merely formal attendance,” he said.
Simon said participation without meaningful influence could instead weaken Indonesia’s role.
“If Indonesia only becomes a complement in a forum, then what dominates is not Indonesia’s national interest, but the agenda of other parties,” Simon said.
For that reason, he added, clarity about Indonesia’s position and contribution is crucial.
He also pointed to what he described as a gap between peace narratives and the political practices of some global actors. In several cases, he noted, coercive approaches, military pressure and the use of armed force remain part of the foreign policies of major powers.
“In this context, it is important to keep testing the meaning of the peace being offered — whether it truly reflects justice and respect for sovereignty,” he said.
He argued that Indonesia has maintained a consistent record of rejecting annexation, occupation and violations of other countries’ sovereignty.
He emphasized that Indonesia’s stance on Palestine and its commitment to international law have long served as a moral foundation of national diplomacy. Engagement in a forum whose position on those principles is not yet fully clear, he warned, should be anticipated carefully so it does not set a precedent that clashes with values Indonesia has upheld.
“Sustainable peace must go hand in hand with justice,” he said.
Simon also saw the risk of “peace” being reframed toward mere post-conflict management. He argued that discussing reconstruction without addressing the roots of conflict could blur efforts to prevent future violence.
“Such an approach risks placing war as something seemingly inseparable from the political process,” he said.
On Indonesia’s international reputation, he said the country has long been viewed as a balancing voice, particularly among Global South nations.
He cautioned that engagement in forums heavily shaped by geopolitical interests must be managed carefully to avoid eroding that trust.
“Moral credibility is a strategic asset that takes a long time to build, and it can be worn away if not protected,” he said.
Simon said the main challenge for Indonesia’s diplomacy today is maintaining consistency of values amid increasingly complex geopolitical dynamics. He argued that Indonesia’s presence on the international stage must always be accompanied by firm principles.
“History will judge Indonesia not by how often it shows up in global forums, but by its ability to defend justice, peace and humanity,” he said.
Indonesianpost.com | Antara