Prabowo Subianto may take over as president of Indonesia next month, and there is growing hope that the soldier-turned-politician will play a more confrontational role for the country on a global scale.
While Prabowo’s aspirations for a prospective dramatic change in Indonesia’s diplomacy signal a potential dramatic change, any strategic change must be wisely balanced in light of the nation’s numerous pressing domestic economic issues.
It will be crucial to give foreign policies and initiatives a emphasizing in order to ensure that Indonesia’s people receive tangible benefits from a more activist politics.
Prabowo’s aspirations for a foreign policy, which were made known by his political appearances as defense minister, are now a major departure from Joko Widodo, who tended to adopt a cautious and pragmatic approach that emphasizes the preservation of stable international relations.
Many people anticipate that Prabowo does play a more significant role in shaping Indonesia’s world position and position. His initiatives to day, not least a proposed Ukraine harmony plan calling for a demilitarized zone and UN referendum, demonstrate a desire to uplift Indonesia’s international standing.
His high-profile visits to France, Turkey and Russia, however, underscore his ambition to develop ties with vital world powers on all sides of deepening political divides and position Indonesia as a popular, if not essential, middle-ground player and also possible mediator.
This proactive approach probably aligns with growing expectations for thick powers like Indonesia, the world’s fourth-largest nation and Southeast Asia’s largest economy, to enjoy a larger role in global management.
With the world’s “non-aligned” past and current decision against joining the BRICS gathering, increasingly seen as an anti-Western alliance led by China and Russia, it is well-positioned to stake out natural terrain on the international stage.  ,
Indeed, Indonesia’s ability to bridge geopolitical divisions will likely increase its influence within important multilateral organizations like the United Nations and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations ( ASEAN ).
Prabowo will also need to use his globalist diplomacy to achieve economic success. These include the establishment of strategic international partnerships, targeted infrastructure and education investments, and a commitment to industrial diversification driven by FDI.
His diplomatic contacts with nations like France and Turkey could, for instance, attract FDI to sectors like manufacturing and renewable energy.
On the other hand, strengthening bilateral relations with Russia and China could improve trade and infrastructure collaboration, giving Indonesia the tools and resources it need for economic modernization.
By aligning foreign policy with domestic imperatives, Prabowo is well-placed to diversify Indonesia’s economic partnerships and reduce dependence on any single global power. This diversification would help protect the nation from external shocks and strengthen its standing as a negotiating partner on a global scale.
Prabowo must ensure that his international engagements are pursued in Indonesia in order to benefit ordinary Indonesians in ways that are not only based on their diplomatic value but also because they are intrinsically linked to improving their livelihoods, thereby enabling them to profit from globalization.
While Prabowo’s foreign policy initiatives have generally received a favorable response from Indonesians, his administration must also set realistic expectations to counteract the enthusiasm.
To be sure, Indonesia’s ascent to a major player on the global stage will take time. The immediate focus of Prabowo’s diplomacy, thus, should remain on addressing domestic challenges and improving the economy.
This integrated strategy will not only augment Indonesia’s global power and influence but also safeguard its long-term economic prosperity, all the while building Prabowo’s stature as a respected global statesman.
Former Indonesian Foreign Ministry diplomat Simon Hutagalung He graduated from the City University of New York with his master’s degree in political science and comparative politics. The views expressed here are his own.