Indonesia Should Rethink Trump's Board of Peace Gambit

When Donald Trump unveiled his "Board of Peace" initiative at Davos last week, Indonesia's President Prabowo Subianto was quick to sign on. But back in Jakarta, foreign policy experts are questioning whether this spontaneous commitment aligns with Indonesia's long-standing diplomatic principles.

The decision has exposed a fundamental tension in Indonesian foreign policy: balancing pragmatic engagement with the US against its traditional role as a champion of Palestinian rights and multilateral diplomacy.

An Initiative Without Clear Rules

Trump's Board of Peace promises to resolve "global conflicts," but its structure remains deliberately vague. Unlike established international frameworks, this ad hoc initiative operates outside traditional diplomatic channels, potentially undermining institutions like the United Nations that Indonesia has historically supported.

Virdika Rizky Utama, a researcher at Jakarta's PARA Syndicate think tank, argues that "an ad hoc initiative that sidelines Palestinians is a poor fit for Jakarta's rule-based diplomacy." This criticism strikes at the heart of Indonesia's foreign policy identity.

With 87% of its population being Muslim, Indonesia has consistently advocated for Palestinian statehood. The country's diplomatic credibility in the Islamic world partly rests on this principled stance. Trump's framework, however, appears designed to bypass Palestinian representation entirely.

The Middle Power Dilemma

Indonesia's participation reflects a broader challenge facing middle powers in an increasingly polarized world. As the US-China rivalry intensifies, countries like Indonesia find themselves pressured to choose sides, even when their interests lie in maintaining strategic autonomy.

The economic calculus is compelling. Closer ties with the Trump administration could unlock trade opportunities and investment flows that Indonesia desperately needs for its development goals. The country's economy, while growing, still faces significant infrastructure gaps and unemployment challenges.

Yet the diplomatic costs may be substantial. The Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), the country's top Islamic authority, has already criticized the government's "hasty decision" and called for reconsideration. Domestic Islamic groups view the move as abandoning Indonesia's role as an impartial mediator in Middle Eastern conflicts.

Regional Ripple Effects

Indonesia isn't alone in facing this dilemma. Trump has extended invitations to other regional powers, including Pakistan and Japan, creating a network of bilateral relationships that could reshape traditional alliance structures.

Pakistan, with its own complex relationships with both the US and China, faces similar pressures. Observers warn that joining Trump's initiative could trigger domestic backlash and complicate Islamabad's delicate balancing act between major powers.

For Indonesia, the China factor adds another layer of complexity. China remains Indonesia's largest trading partner and a key investor through the Belt and Road Initiative. Beijing's reaction to Jakarta's participation in what could be seen as a US-led diplomatic framework remains to be seen.

The Credibility Question

Beyond immediate political calculations lies a deeper question about diplomatic credibility. Indonesia has built its international reputation on ASEAN's consensus-based approach and support for international law. The Board of Peace, by contrast, represents a more transactional, bilateral approach to conflict resolution.

This shift could undermine Indonesia's soft power in Southeast Asia, where it has traditionally been viewed as a principled leader. If Jakarta is seen as too willing to abandon core principles for economic gain, its ability to mediate regional disputes may be compromised.

The timing is particularly awkward given Indonesia's current chairmanship of ASEAN, where it has emphasized the importance of multilateralism and rules-based order.