Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
Cohesive Societies
Sustainable Security
Other Resource Pages
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
External Podcasts
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National SecurityInstitute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      Cohesive SocietiesSustainable SecurityOther Resource PagesNews ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio ChannelExternal Podcasts
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS

      Get in Touch

    Connect
    Search
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • IP23075 | Indonesian Political Parties and Foreign Policy in the 2024 General Election
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • RSIS Commentary Series
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • Future Issues
    • IDSS Papers
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers

    IP23075 | Indonesian Political Parties and Foreign Policy in the 2024 General Election
    Adhi Priamarizki, Muhamad Haripin

    26 October 2023

    download pdf


    Indonesian political parties rarely express their foreign policy views in the run-up to the 2024 general election. MUHAMAD HARIPIN and ADHI PRIAMARIZKI argue that the underlying problem of the lack of discussion on foreign policy goes beyond the subject’s unpopularity.

       

     

     

    COMMENTARY

    Recent debates surrounding Indonesia’s 2024 general election (GE) mainly revolve around the presidential candidates and how political parties attempt to capitalise on the coattail effect. Conversely, debates on policy platforms are largely absent, let alone discussions of each party’s views on foreign policy. In the run-up to the 2024 GE, the extent of Indonesian political parties engaging with external relations is limited to examples of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP)’s rejection of the Israeli national football team to compete in the U-20 World Cup, which Indonesia was set to host, and the Islam-based Prosperous Justice Party (PKS)’s support for the Palestinian struggle, which the party has been vocal about.

    Political parties in many parts of the world play a role in foreign policymaking. The question then is: why do Indonesian political parties give such little attention to foreign policy debates? One possible answer is the lack of interest in foreign policy among the general population. Discussions on foreign affairs only capture some segments of society, primarily the educated urban population, although some issues, such as the Palestinian struggle, generate greater public attention. However, our examination on Indonesian political parties and their external relations reveals that foreign policy negligence is caused not only by lack of popularity but also political pragmatism and absence of clear foreign policy guidelines within the parties.

    IP23075
    Indonesia’s political parties appear to give little attention to the country’s foreign policy debates, even during the run-up to the 2024 general election. Instead, parties prefer to focus on political pragmatism given the absence of proper foreign policy guidelines. Image by authors.

    Political Pragmatism and Absence of Guidelines

    In the 1950s, political ideology had prompted Indonesian political parties to be actively involved in foreign policymaking. For instance, the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) openly proposed closer relations with either the Soviet Union or China, in line with the party’s ideology. Meanwhile, nationalist and Islamist parties counterbalanced PKI by forging relations with the Western bloc, notably the United States.

    However, such ideological contestation in foreign affairs is almost nonexistent in Indonesian politics today. Since 1998, political ideology has played a small role in shaping electoral strategy and long-term objectives in Indonesian politics, primarily due to the practice of client politics and the personalistic structure of political parties. Furthermore, securing control over patronage resources, notably the state budget, has been at the core of attention in Indonesia’s presidential elections. Transactional politics has largely been the norm, rather than adherence to political ideology. Consequently, the absence of ideology has diminished the drive for political parties to play an active role in foreign policymaking.

    While contemporary Indonesian political parties regularly conduct meetings with their foreign counterparts, most of these meetings are aimed at networking or as a form of silaturahmi. For instance, PKS occasionally has meetings with the Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) on a national and regional level. Nonetheless, regional-level interactions between PKS and PAS mainly occur between regional branches within close proximity, such as PKS Riau Islands and PAS Johor Bahru.

    Several Indonesian political parties such as PDIP, Golkar (Party of Functional Groups), Gerindra (Great Indonesia Movement), and Nasdem (National Democrat) have also maintained relations with Malaysia’s UMNO (United Malays National Organisation). In May 2023, Golkar and UMNO leaders met and agreed to collaborate on a youth empowerment agenda. Both parties asserted that the young generation plays a salient role in bolstering electoral gains. These types of meetings, nevertheless, are rarely followed up by anything formal. In general, the pattern of interaction between Indonesian political parties and their foreign counterparts indicate pragmatism rather than ideological engagement.

    The next issue is the absence of proper foreign policy guidelines. The Memorandum and Article of Association (Anggaran Dasar dan Anggaran Rumah Tangga, or AD/ART) of Indonesian political parties rarely outline foreign policy aspirations and objectives. Indonesian political parties in general comprise a foreign affairs division, which provides analyses and recommendations regarding foreign policy. However, unclear guidelines often result in analyses and recommendations formulated on a case-by-case basis rather than products of ideology.

    In contrast, personalistic power structures within political parties lead to the domination of internal decision making. For instance, in the wake of escalating violence in Gaza, PDIP Chairwoman Megawati Sukarnoputi instructed the party’s secretary-general, Hasto Kristiyanto, to meet with the Palestinian Ambassador to Indonesia, Zuhair Al-Shun, to convey a message of solidarity. Hasto also reiterated PDIP’s position in supporting the Palestinian struggle for liberation. Similarly, Golkar Chairman Airlangga Hartarto condemned the continued Israel-Palestine conflict. He urged the Indonesian government, the United Nations, and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation to intervene in this issue.

    Implications for Indonesia’s Foreign Policy

    Political parties represent streams of political ideology. The absence of ideology in political parties discourages the creation of a foreign policy agenda. Thus, Indonesia’s strategic pragmatism to foreign policy will persist as there are no real incentives to alter the pattern.

    In addition, political pragmatism hinders a more systematic foreign policy. Instead, it allows a more personalistic foreign policy in which external relations depend on the interests and wits of the executive leaders. This restricts the role of foreign policy bureaucracy to merely an executor rather than an architect.

    Another consequence is the lack of checks and balances in the implementation of foreign policy. Lack of attention to unpopular foreign policies certainly gives political parties little motivation for thorough supervision. However, political parties may be eager to engage in foreign affairs when the issues attract significant public attention.

    The continued neglect of foreign policy reflects the diminishing role of ideology in Indonesian politics. Furthermore, an erratic president could enhance the pragmatic and personalistic nature of Indonesia’s foreign policy, and even increase the unpredictability of the country’s handling of foreign affairs.

     

    MUHAMAD Haripin is a Research Coordinator of Conflict, Defence and Security Studies at the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN). Adhi PRIAMARIZKI is a Research Fellow with the Indonesia Programme, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS).

    Categories: IDSS Papers / General / Southeast Asia and ASEAN


    Indonesian political parties rarely express their foreign policy views in the run-up to the 2024 general election. MUHAMAD HARIPIN and ADHI PRIAMARIZKI argue that the underlying problem of the lack of discussion on foreign policy goes beyond the subject’s unpopularity.

       

     

     

    COMMENTARY

    Recent debates surrounding Indonesia’s 2024 general election (GE) mainly revolve around the presidential candidates and how political parties attempt to capitalise on the coattail effect. Conversely, debates on policy platforms are largely absent, let alone discussions of each party’s views on foreign policy. In the run-up to the 2024 GE, the extent of Indonesian political parties engaging with external relations is limited to examples of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP)’s rejection of the Israeli national football team to compete in the U-20 World Cup, which Indonesia was set to host, and the Islam-based Prosperous Justice Party (PKS)’s support for the Palestinian struggle, which the party has been vocal about.

    Political parties in many parts of the world play a role in foreign policymaking. The question then is: why do Indonesian political parties give such little attention to foreign policy debates? One possible answer is the lack of interest in foreign policy among the general population. Discussions on foreign affairs only capture some segments of society, primarily the educated urban population, although some issues, such as the Palestinian struggle, generate greater public attention. However, our examination on Indonesian political parties and their external relations reveals that foreign policy negligence is caused not only by lack of popularity but also political pragmatism and absence of clear foreign policy guidelines within the parties.

    IP23075
    Indonesia’s political parties appear to give little attention to the country’s foreign policy debates, even during the run-up to the 2024 general election. Instead, parties prefer to focus on political pragmatism given the absence of proper foreign policy guidelines. Image by authors.

    Political Pragmatism and Absence of Guidelines

    In the 1950s, political ideology had prompted Indonesian political parties to be actively involved in foreign policymaking. For instance, the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) openly proposed closer relations with either the Soviet Union or China, in line with the party’s ideology. Meanwhile, nationalist and Islamist parties counterbalanced PKI by forging relations with the Western bloc, notably the United States.

    However, such ideological contestation in foreign affairs is almost nonexistent in Indonesian politics today. Since 1998, political ideology has played a small role in shaping electoral strategy and long-term objectives in Indonesian politics, primarily due to the practice of client politics and the personalistic structure of political parties. Furthermore, securing control over patronage resources, notably the state budget, has been at the core of attention in Indonesia’s presidential elections. Transactional politics has largely been the norm, rather than adherence to political ideology. Consequently, the absence of ideology has diminished the drive for political parties to play an active role in foreign policymaking.

    While contemporary Indonesian political parties regularly conduct meetings with their foreign counterparts, most of these meetings are aimed at networking or as a form of silaturahmi. For instance, PKS occasionally has meetings with the Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) on a national and regional level. Nonetheless, regional-level interactions between PKS and PAS mainly occur between regional branches within close proximity, such as PKS Riau Islands and PAS Johor Bahru.

    Several Indonesian political parties such as PDIP, Golkar (Party of Functional Groups), Gerindra (Great Indonesia Movement), and Nasdem (National Democrat) have also maintained relations with Malaysia’s UMNO (United Malays National Organisation). In May 2023, Golkar and UMNO leaders met and agreed to collaborate on a youth empowerment agenda. Both parties asserted that the young generation plays a salient role in bolstering electoral gains. These types of meetings, nevertheless, are rarely followed up by anything formal. In general, the pattern of interaction between Indonesian political parties and their foreign counterparts indicate pragmatism rather than ideological engagement.

    The next issue is the absence of proper foreign policy guidelines. The Memorandum and Article of Association (Anggaran Dasar dan Anggaran Rumah Tangga, or AD/ART) of Indonesian political parties rarely outline foreign policy aspirations and objectives. Indonesian political parties in general comprise a foreign affairs division, which provides analyses and recommendations regarding foreign policy. However, unclear guidelines often result in analyses and recommendations formulated on a case-by-case basis rather than products of ideology.

    In contrast, personalistic power structures within political parties lead to the domination of internal decision making. For instance, in the wake of escalating violence in Gaza, PDIP Chairwoman Megawati Sukarnoputi instructed the party’s secretary-general, Hasto Kristiyanto, to meet with the Palestinian Ambassador to Indonesia, Zuhair Al-Shun, to convey a message of solidarity. Hasto also reiterated PDIP’s position in supporting the Palestinian struggle for liberation. Similarly, Golkar Chairman Airlangga Hartarto condemned the continued Israel-Palestine conflict. He urged the Indonesian government, the United Nations, and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation to intervene in this issue.

    Implications for Indonesia’s Foreign Policy

    Political parties represent streams of political ideology. The absence of ideology in political parties discourages the creation of a foreign policy agenda. Thus, Indonesia’s strategic pragmatism to foreign policy will persist as there are no real incentives to alter the pattern.

    In addition, political pragmatism hinders a more systematic foreign policy. Instead, it allows a more personalistic foreign policy in which external relations depend on the interests and wits of the executive leaders. This restricts the role of foreign policy bureaucracy to merely an executor rather than an architect.

    Another consequence is the lack of checks and balances in the implementation of foreign policy. Lack of attention to unpopular foreign policies certainly gives political parties little motivation for thorough supervision. However, political parties may be eager to engage in foreign affairs when the issues attract significant public attention.

    The continued neglect of foreign policy reflects the diminishing role of ideology in Indonesian politics. Furthermore, an erratic president could enhance the pragmatic and personalistic nature of Indonesia’s foreign policy, and even increase the unpredictability of the country’s handling of foreign affairs.

     

    MUHAMAD Haripin is a Research Coordinator of Conflict, Defence and Security Studies at the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN). Adhi PRIAMARIZKI is a Research Fellow with the Indonesia Programme, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS).

    Categories: IDSS Papers / General

    Popular Links

    About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

    Connect with Us

    rsis.ntu
    rsis_ntu
    rsisntu
    rsisvideocast
    school/rsis-ntu
    rsis.sg
    rsissg
    RSIS
    RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    Getting to RSIS

    Nanyang Technological University
    Block S4, Level B3,
    50 Nanyang Avenue,
    Singapore 639798

    Click here for direction to RSIS

    Get in Touch

      Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
      Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
      Help us improve

        Rate your experience with this website
        123456
        Not satisfiedVery satisfied
        What did you like?
        0/255 characters
        What can be improved?
        0/255 characters
        Your email
        Please enter a valid email.
        Thank you for your feedback.
        This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
        OK
        Latest Book
        more info