Since December, the ongoing series of presidential and vice-presidential debates has ignited fervent discussions across society. These five debates are anticipated to guide the public in making informed decisions as they exercise their voting rights.
On Sunday, Jan. 7, the third presidential debate unfolded under the theme “Defense, Security, International Relations, and Geopolitics.” Professor Poppy Sulistyaning Winanti, an esteemed figure in International Relations at UGM, shared her insights on the deliberations.
“In the current climate, we’re witnessing a return to Indonesia’s foreign policy approach over the past decade under President Jokowi’s leadership. Notably, there’s been a recurring emphasis on meeting domestic needs and advancing national interests. This has consistently shaped President Jokowi’s strategy,” remarked Professor Winanti on Tuesday (Jan. 23).
While this policy direction holds promise in bolstering the economy and addressing domestic requirements, it also raises questions about Indonesia’s visibility and influence on the global stage.
For Indonesia to ascend to developed nation status, it must also assert itself internationally.
The trio of presidential candidates presents divergent viewpoints on Indonesia’s international relations and foreign policy.
Anies Baswedan advocates for Indonesia to reassume its role as a global peace enabler. Conversely, Prabowo Subianto emphasizes fortifying the domestic economy as a priority. Meanwhile, Ganjar Pranowo underscores that foreign policy mustn’t neglect national interests. Each perspective underscores the importance of nuanced approaches.
According to Professor Winanti, the contemporary international landscape necessitates viewing the world as a source of potential threats and an avenue for collaboration to complement national interests.
“In my estimation, Prabowo still views the world through the lens of past world wars, perceiving everything as a threat. Ganjar, conversely, acknowledges the need for a discerning foreign policy stance. Anies presents an intriguing vision of how Indonesia can assert itself globally. However, regrettably, the specifics on achieving this and how it differs from the current status quo were not expounded,” Professor Winanti remarked.
The current government has endeavored to carve out Indonesia’s role in the global arena, evidenced by initiatives like South-South cooperation, a focal point in the recent debates.
However, Professor Winanti noted a significant oversight by all three candidates regarding the existence of the International Development Cooperation Fund (LDKPI). This institution manages international development cooperation through aid to foreign governments.
“All three candidates overlooked the presence of LDKPI or Indonesian AID, as highlighted in the debate. If Anies, Ganjar, and Prabowo envision a more substantial Indonesian role in South-South cooperation, acknowledging this institution through the LDKPI would significantly enhance their propositions. Thus, I believe South-South cooperation could be fortified through this avenue,” Professor Winanti emphasized.
Economically, Indonesia boasts considerable prowess. Now is the opportune moment to bolster its global stature by extending assistance and guidance to other nations.
The ongoing presidential and vice-presidential debates have reignited public interest in political discourse. However, Professor Winanti underscores the importance of the elected president having a clear direction regarding Indonesia’s free and active foreign policy principles.
“The foundation of our foreign policy lies in the principles of being free and active amid ever-evolving global political dynamics. We must navigate the delicate balance of prioritizing foreign policy to serve domestic interests while simultaneously emphasizing Indonesia’s role on the international stage,” she concluded.
Author: Tasya