Indonesia’s evolving stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, increasingly informed by a nuanced understanding of public sentiment, represents a significant development in regional geopolitics. Recent research, culminating in a dissemination event examining Indonesian elite and public views on the conflict, reveals a complex interplay of historical commitment, pragmatic considerations, and a growing awareness of the limitations of traditional diplomatic approaches. This analysis explores the key findings of the study, the underlying motivations driving Indonesia’s foreign policy, and potential implications for regional stability.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains a cornerstone of Indonesia’s foreign policy, deeply rooted in the nation’s founding principles of solidarity with the oppressed and its historical alignment with the Bandung Spirit – a commitment to multilateralism and non-alignment. However, the increasingly visible humanitarian crisis in Gaza and evolving global dynamics are prompting a re-evaluation of this longstanding commitment. The study, conducted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Foreign Policy Strategy Agency (BSKLN) in collaboration with the Center for International Relations of the Institute for Social and Political Research and Development at Universitas Indonesia (CIRes LPPSP UI), indicates a significant shift in public perception. Initial data suggests a convergence on the core issues – the illegitimacy of Israeli occupation, the need for a just resolution based on a two-state solution – but also reveals considerable disagreement regarding the specific mechanisms for achieving this.
Key Stakeholders and Motivations:
Indonesia’s foreign policy towards the conflict is shaped by a confluence of actors. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through BSKLN, remains the primary driver, aiming to uphold Indonesia's historical commitments. However, the influence of academia, particularly through CIRes LPPSP UI, adds a critical analytical layer. Public opinion, heavily influenced by media narratives and socio-economic realities, presents a substantial, albeit less formally quantifiable, force. The United States continues to exert significant influence, primarily through diplomatic pressure and economic leverage. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), while still seeking international support, faces challenges in effectively navigating the complexities of the conflict. According to a 2024 report by the International Crisis Group, “Palestinian diplomatic efforts have been consistently hampered by a lack of leverage and a perceived inability to challenge the status quo.”
The study’s findings highlighted a notable divergence between elite views on settlement expansion and the feasibility of a two-state solution. While a majority of Indonesian elites acknowledge the strategic and legal arguments against continued settlements, concerns persist regarding the practical implications of a ‘one-state’ scenario. This reflects a broader trend observed globally: the growing apprehension about the potential for protracted conflict and the difficulty of achieving lasting peace without a clear demarcation of territorial boundaries and a viable Palestinian state. Data from a 2025 survey conducted by the Indonesian Survey Circle revealed that 62% of Indonesians believe a two-state solution is the only viable long-term solution, but 38% expressed reservations due to the perceived lack of progress and the potential for further Israeli expansion.
Challenges to Traditional Diplomacy:
The effectiveness of traditional diplomatic channels – primarily UN resolutions and international pressure campaigns – is increasingly viewed with skepticism. According to Broto Wardoyo, Ph.D., “The current international system is demonstrably failing to address the core injustices of the conflict. The rise of unilateral action and the erosion of multilateral institutions have diminished the ability of collective action to effect change.” This sentiment aligns with a broader trend observed in the Global South, where states are increasingly prioritizing self-reliance and pragmatic engagement over adherence to rigid international norms. Furthermore, the study identified a growing awareness of the influence of U.S. policy, particularly the unconditional support afforded to Israel, as a key impediment to achieving a just resolution.
Indonesia’s enduring commitment to the Bandung Spirit, however, suggests a desire to navigate this complex landscape. As Akhmad Masbukhin, Senior Strategist at BSKLN, emphasized, "Indonesia will not cease its support for the Palestinian people’s struggle for independence. This reflects our long-standing commitment to the Bandung Spirit and our continued promotion of a two-state solution." This commitment extends beyond symbolic gestures; Indonesia actively engages in Track II diplomacy and supports Palestinian efforts to engage with regional actors, including Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Short-Term and Long-Term Implications:
In the next six months, Indonesia is likely to maintain its position as a vocal critic of Israeli policies and will continue to advocate for a negotiated settlement. However, the emphasis will likely shift toward fostering regional dialogue and exploring alternative avenues for engagement. A key focus will be on strengthening ties with countries that share Indonesia's concerns about the conflict, particularly within the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
Over the next five to ten years, Indonesia’s role in the conflict could become increasingly significant. The nation’s growing economic influence and its strategic location within Southeast Asia could provide leverage for promoting a more balanced approach to the conflict. However, sustained engagement will require a fundamental re-evaluation of Indonesia's diplomatic strategies, adapting to a world where traditional power dynamics are increasingly challenged and where achieving lasting peace requires innovative and multi-faceted solutions. The challenges remain substantial, but Indonesia’s willingness to confront these complexities presents a valuable opportunity to contribute to a more just and stable regional order.