Introduction
President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo’s choice to forgo the 44th ASEAN Summit – which took place in Vientiane, Laos, on 9 October 2024 – constitutes a strategic miscalculation that might deeply affect Indonesia’s regional stature and foreign policy aims.
As the largest member and de facto leader of ASEAN, Indonesia’s participation in the high-level event is crucial for steering the bloc’s direction, fostering unity and addressing common concerns among all members.
At a critical moment requiring Jakarta’s leadership, Jokowi unintentionally undermined Indonesia’s dedication to ASEAN by attributing his absence to domestic transitional factors.
Indonesia, ASEAN’s (Supposedly) De Facto Leader
The constructivist theory posits that state behavior is shaped by both their material capabilities as well as the values and norms they aspire to project and embody.
Indonesia’s sustained role as the de facto leader of ASEAN is predicated on its active engagement, influence and commitment to the collective norms and ideals of the region. This is because norms and ideas about leadership are established via ongoing actions and interactions.
This is also evidenced through the pivotal role Indonesia has played under Jokowi’s administration, influencing the overall trajectory of the ASEAN through its advocacy for initiatives such as the ASEAN Charter, the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP) and the Five-Point Consensus concerning the Myanmar crisis.
These contributions profoundly influence ASEAN’s identity and strategic stance in recent times.
Furthermore, the constructivist perspective also posits that ongoing interactions and sustained engagement in diplomatic contexts influence the comprehension of leadership. For example, Jokowi’s participation in past summits enhanced Indonesia’s standing and emphasized the nation’s normative position as the primary catalyst of ASEAN.
The prevailing view of Indonesia as a reliable leader and guardian of ASEAN principles is thus threatened by Jokowi’s choice to abstain from the Summit. The dual nature of leadership – encompassing both authority and the preservation of credibility to exemplify effective guidance – suggests that this change in perception could hinder Indonesia’s ability to influence the agenda inside the bloc.
In light of Jokowi’s absence, Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh conveyed his hope for Indonesia’s ongoing contribution to ASEAN’s development under the new administration’s leadership.
Even Prime Minister Sonexay Siphandone of Laos commended Indonesia for its historical achievements and recognized that Jokowi’s attendance would have bolstered the bloc’s cohesion in tackling regional concerns.
Such sentiments represent the heightened expectations of Indonesia’s ASEAN allies, rendering Jokowi’s absence even more significant.
Jokowi is also a prominent leader who has established contacts within the bloc—his absence has thus deprived Indonesia of an opportunity to reaffirm its leadership role and presence in the region.
This absence could potentially create a leadership gap, opening the door for other parties with differing or competing interests to assert themselves and shape the regional agenda in ways that might not align with Indonesia’s strategic goals.
While Vice President Ma’ruf Amin’s participation guaranteed Indonesia’s representation, the nation’s diplomatic stature was not on a level with that of other countries. Due to Ma’ruf’s insufficient expertise in international diplomacy, he was unable to effectively convey Indonesia’s influence and engage in critical discussions.
This is not the first time Jokowi has skipped international events. Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi has consistently championed Indonesia’s interests internationally, often compensating for the president when Jokowi prioritized domestic and political interests.
In the absence of the head of state’s direct involvement, even the most adept diplomat can achieve only marginal success in their diplomatic efforts. Indonesia’s foreign policy necessitates more than a mere assortment of activities; it demands sustained high-level engagement to ensure legitimacy and efficacy.
The Reason
The Foreign Ministry press briefing stated that Jokowi’s absence is due to his involvement in the power transition process, as Prabowo Subianto is slated to take over the presidency post later this month. However, this inadequately justified the choice to forgo such a significant gathering.
With more than a week remaining before Prabowo’s inauguration, Jokowi has more than sufficient time to complete all his outstanding obligations to ASEAN. His participation in upholding the legacy of his foreign policy and assuring ASEAN allies of Indonesia’s steadfast commitment would have been appropriate.
Jokowi’s decision to stay back thus eclipsed the objectives of his administration, leading many to question whether ASEAN was genuinely a priority for Jakarta during his tenure.
What This Means to ASEAN
The current situation in ASEAN renders this omission particularly noteworthy and troubling. The region is presently confronting multiple intricate challenges, such as the escalating rivalry between the United States and China, the humanitarian crisis in Myanmar, and repercussions from major conflicts in several parts of the world.
The leadership of Indonesia is crucial for guiding the bloc through what will seem to be several tumultuous years in the future. Under Prabowo’s administration, Jakarta must reaffirm Indonesia’s position as the regional anchor in order to maintain Indonesia’s proactive involvement and ensure continuity as well as stability within ASEAN.
The constructivist thesis also argues that Indonesia’s leadership role in ASEAN is dependent on both power dynamics and the norms and expectations of other nations regarding Jakarta. The normative authority of Indonesia is undermined if it fails to fulfil these expectations, thus obstructing the nation’s capacity to lead by consensus and secure backing for its initiatives.
Jokowi’s choice may inadvertently prompt other regional leaders to scrutinize Indonesia’s dedication to the collective ideals and principles of ASEAN, unbeknownst to him. Given that Indonesia – the conventional linchpin of ASEAN – may forgo participation in such a significant assembly, it is perplexing why other nations would feel obligated to attend every conference.
Worse, it might send the wrong signal that ASEAN high-level meetings are no longer worthy of its leaders’ time and effort, a significant blow to the multilateral process in Southeast Asia.
Moreover, it might trigger a broader concern with Indonesia’s foreign policy. Despite the administration’s focus on pragmatic diplomacy and economic development, it often lacks constructive engagement in regional and global issues.
For example, critics pointed out Indonesia’s lack of gusto in asserting pressure to stop violence in Myanmar, even as the country chaired ASEAN last year. This reflective viewpoint has strengthened the suspicion that Indonesia may have diverged from its conventional leadership role in the region, though deeper investigation is necessary.
Although Jokowi’s decision may yield short-term benefits to his political agenda, it undermines the nation’s global influence and reputation. This disengagement may have enduring consequences for the strategic significance of a nation seeking to establish itself as a middle power in Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific while expanding its economic influence in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Conclusion and Ways Forward
Indonesia’s involvement in ASEAN Summits and other regional fora should be regarded as essential platforms for the nation to assert its influence on the future trajectory of regional developments.
Jokowi’s absence jeopardizes Indonesia’s regional standing and somewhat weakens ASEAN’s unity in navigating a challenging geopolitical landscape, constituting a diplomatic misstep and a strategic error.
This is unfortunate considering Indonesia is gaining significance amid the intricate dynamics of the region, characterized by competition among major countries and domestic political instability.
The Indonesian authorities must acknowledge the imperative for a more assertive and engaged foreign policy to uphold ASEAN’s centrality as well as to ensure Jakarta’s prominence in regional leadership.
Only through unwavering engagement can Indonesia sustain its role as the cornerstone of ASEAN and a significant contributor to Southeast Asia’s growth.
With the transition to a new administration under Prabowo, Indonesia has a substantial chance to realign its foreign policy and restore its leadership role within ASEAN. Prabowo clearly comprehends the importance of regional and international ties, as evidenced by his broad diplomatic initiatives following his decisive political triumph.
Prabowo must prioritize fortifying Indonesia’s standing within ASEAN, championing initiatives to uphold regional tranquillity and ensuring that Jakarta remains a reliable leader and ally. In short, he needs to quickly ameliorate this reputational damage.v
