As Prabowo Subianto assumed office as Indonesia’s President on October 20, 2024, his inaugural speech set a tone of anti-colonialism, sovereignty, and self-sufficiency that aligns closely with his foreign policy vision. This rhetoric, familiar in Indonesia’s diplomatic lexicon, appears to be driving a recalibrated approach in Prabowo’s administration, which is prioritising multi-alignment amid shifting global power dynamics.
Prabowo’s rhetoric around anti-colonialism and resistance to Western double standards is more than symbolic; it directly informs Indonesia’s pivot towards BRICS. His narrative is rooted in a rejection of what he perceives as Western “neo-colonial” practices, particularly in the economic sector. At the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in 2023, he highlighted Western countries’ inconsistencies on issues like deforestation and sustainability, citing their palm oil restrictions while simultaneously demanding free trade. Prabowo’s commitment to self-sufficiency, especially in food security, is integral to this vision. He has previously criticised the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for undermining Indonesia’s food resilience and restricting the role of BULOG, the national food logistics agency. In contrast, BRICS’s New Development Bank offers an alternative funding source free from IMF-style conditions, positioning itself as an attractive partner for Prabowo’s administration.
This vision is now crystallising with Indonesia’s pursuit of BRICS membership, which is being paired with its ongoing efforts toward OECD accession. As the Indonesian government drafts its initial memorandum for OECD accession, it is aiming to meet the dual goals of reforming its domestic market while maintaining a balanced international posture. The OECD’s 15% Global Minimum Tax, scheduled to take effect in January 2025, exemplifies this duality. While OECD standards encourage foreign investment and economic modernization, they also pose significant challenges, especially for Indonesia’s lower-income population who may feel the brunt of compliance costs.
Indonesia’s potential as a bridge between BRICS and ASEAN holds considerable geopolitical promise. With its economic heft and diplomatic sway, Indonesia could act as a liaison between these organisations, facilitating dialogue and collaborative initiatives. This role aligns with Indonesia’s bebas-aktif (independent and active) foreign policy principle, which prioritises strategic autonomy while fostering cooperative relations across various international blocs. Yury Ushakov, a senior Russian official, recently suggested that Indonesia’s membership would lend legitimacy to BRICS’s evolving mandate, adding weight to Jakarta’s expanding role within the bloc.
ASEAN, where Indonesia leads as the largest economy, has long served as a regional stabiliser amid intensifying U.S.-China rivalry. By advancing its ASEAN membership while also pursuing BRICS, Indonesia is well-positioned to bridge the two organisations and foster South-South cooperation. Its role as a facilitator could encourage more cohesive regional approaches, from sustainable development to technology-sharing, ultimately bolstering ASEAN’s influence in the Indo-Pacific. Such a stance also offers ASEAN countries an alternative to exclusive alignment with either China or the U.S., reinforcing the bloc’s collective agency.
While Indonesia’s multi-alignment strategy aims to maximise its geopolitical leverage, Prabowo’s dual-track approach—joining both BRICS and OECD—is subject to domestic and international challenges. Many Indonesians have expressed concerns over BRICS membership, wary of the potential geopolitical repercussions and the perceived alignment with states like Russia and China. Critics argue that BRICS membership could undermine Indonesia’s long-standing non-aligned position, though the administration counters that the bloc offers a South-South cooperation platform distinct from traditional alliances.
At the same time, Indonesia’s OECD aspirations also pose challenges, including unclear pathways surrounding Israel’s role within the organisation. The global minimum tax, a centrepiece of Indonesia’s OECD alignment, faces domestic criticism as it may burden lower-income households, fueling apprehensions about the potential costs of OECD alignment. This tension between BRICS and OECD memberships reflects a broader domestic discourse over Indonesia’s foreign policy direction, with Prabowo navigating public expectations and strategic realities to forge a balanced path.
Indonesia’s diplomatic recalibration occurs against the backdrop of shifting global power dynamics. The Western-dominated post-Cold War order is increasingly contested, as Western influence wanes relative to the growing clout of emerging economies. Western responses to global crises, such as the tepid support for Palestinian independence and the ongoing conflict in Gaza, have amplified scepticism among emerging economies about the West’s commitment to fair international standards. Western nations’ limited action on these issues, contrasted with continued support for Israel amid accusations of war crimes, has further fueled calls for non-Western solidarity.
In this context, Prabowo’s anti-Western stance resonates with domestic audiences who view Indonesia’s multi-alignment strategy as an expression of sovereignty and a rejection of perceived Western hypocrisy. By engaging both BRICS and OECD, Prabowo’s administration is advancing a pragmatic approach that leverages Indonesia’s position as a middle power with significant agency on the global stage. This multi-alignment allows Indonesia to maintain its foreign policy autonomy while maximising its access to diverse economic and strategic opportunities.
Prabowo’s approach reflects Indonesia’s commitment to bebas-aktif in a way that adapts to today’s multipolar world. Through strategic engagement with BRICS and OECD, Indonesia is reinforcing its role as a non-aligned, independent actor that can leverage its relationships across multiple blocs. However, the administration must manage delicate balances. Increased U.S.-China competition, coupled with calls for clearer alignment from global powers, may force Indonesia to navigate complex geopolitical pressures. Sophisticated diplomacy, transparent articulation of national interests, and domestic alignment will be critical to the success of this strategy.
Ultimately, Indonesia’s stance offers an alternative model for emerging economies seeking to secure their interests without sacrificing sovereignty. By anchoring its foreign policy in pragmatic, sovereignty-driven multi-alignment, Prabowo’s administration is positioning Indonesia not only as a regional leader but as an influential middle power capable of bridging divides in an increasingly fragmented world.
