Megawati: Indonesia’s political system doesn’t recognize oppositions and coalitions

Megawati Soekarnoputri is once again lecturing the nation from a podium padded with nostalgia and selective memory.

At PDIP’s 6th Congress in Bali, following her reelection as party leader until 2030, she confidently announced that “there’s no such thing as opposition or coalition in Indonesia’s presidential system,” arguing that such dichotomies belong only in parliamentary governments. She then doubled down, framing Indonesia’s democracy as one “based on the people’s sovereignty and the Constitution,” and insisting that PDIP would now act as an “ideological balancing force” rather than opposition.

It’s the kind of speech that sounds profound until you remember how politics in this country actually works.

Let’s start with the basics. Coalitions are not just a feature of Indonesia’s political system, they’re a structural necessity. You need them to qualify for the presidential race. You need them to pass legislation. You need them to govern. There is no constitutional path to power without them. The electoral threshold makes sure of that. So Megawati’s insistence on semantics changes nothing about how political parties operate in practice. If anything, it’s an attempt to overwrite the obvious with rhetorical fog.

Without a coalition, Megawati wouldn’t have had Prabowo Subianto as her running mate in 2008, the same Prabowo whose party just beat hers in the 2024 election, and who spent a solid decade as the loudest, most confrontational opposition to the Jokowi administration, which PDIP dominated. Never mind that in the final years of Jokowi’s term, Gerindra’s loyalty in that so-called coalition was visibly eroding.

That same “nonexistent” coalition also helped put Jokowi and Ahok into City Hall in Jakarta. And let’s not forget, oppositions, even if not enshrined in constitutional vocabulary, have existed and operated for decades in this country. Political parties outside power have always criticized, challenged, and scrutinized those in it. They hold press conferences. They file lawsuits. They propose alternatives. That’s called being the opposition, regardless of whether Megawati feels like saying the word out loud.

Oppositions and coalitions in Indonesia are as inevitable as Jakarta’s traffic jams, they only disappear during Lebaran holidays when no one’s around. So why deny them now?

Well, it’s hard not to notice the timing. Megawati’s sudden interest in redefining Indonesia’s entire political vocabulary coincides, coincidentally, of course with President Prabowo’s decision to grant amnesty to PDIP’s Secretary General who was convicted for bribing officials to parachute a party-hopping politician into parliament and sent to 3.5 years in prison. That politician has since gone missing. For five years. But sure, tell us more about constitutional purity.

This is the kind of gaslighting that only works when everyone else agrees to play along. Megawati wants to position PDIP as above the fray, “a critical balancer,” not opposition, not loyalist, just… conveniently in between. But you don’t get to erase the last 25 years of your own party’s behavior and pretend the entire system is suddenly different because you’re not in charge anymore.

Megawati still sees herself as the matriarch of Indonesian politics, cloaked in Sukarnoist symbolism and mythic authority. But at some point, that legacy turns into a liability, especially when it’s used to blur history, dodge accountability, and deny the very dynamics that made her party viable in the first place.

If PDIP wants to stay relevant in a post-Jokowi, post-victory Gerindra era, it needs more than ideological posturing. It needs to stop pretending that the system it thrived in doesn’t exist. Because it obviously does.

And it’s probably a sign that the party needs new leadership and direction. As it stands it will never not be known as the party of whatever she wants it to be.

Indonesia declared war on the One Piece flag

In what might be the most unintentionally self-owns in modern governance, parliamentary leaders have claimed that the Straw Hat Jolly Roger — the beloved skull-and-crossbones from One Piece — represents separatist tendencies and is being used by shadowy forces who want the Prabowo government to collapse (the news even made it to Screen Rant of all places). The flag has since been targeted for criminalization, under the claim that it’s “provocative,” “disrespectful,” and “threatening national unity.”

So let’s get this straight: a cartoon pirate flag — flown initially by angry truck drivers protesting against what they claim to be unjust safety laws — is now being treated like an act of sedition. Because in a country that refuses to hold corrupt conglomerates accountable, it’s easier to demonize drivers than fix the system. And it’s easier to vilify a pirate crew from a manga than face public anger that refuses to stay quiet.

The real kicker is that any One Piece fan can see it from ten thousand nautical miles away.

The people trying to ban the Straw Hat flag? They sound exactly like the villains in the story.

The rhetoric, about order, unity, suppressing dangerous symbols, and punishing those who question authority, is textbook World Government. This is Gorosei energy. This is the Tenryuubito clutching their pearls because the commoners dared to speak. This is CP0-level control tactics dressed up in nationalistic language. And just like in the manga, it’s not about real threats. It’s about protecting the illusion of stability, no matter how rotten the core has become.

The Straw Hat Pirates in One Piece aren’t the enemy. They’re the ones who sail against corrupt institutions, take down slave-trading elites, and expose the lies propping up unjust empires. Sound familiar? In that universe, flying the Jolly Roger isn’t an act of terrorism — it’s an act of refusal. A refusal to bow, to comply, to play along with a system built to exploit and erase.

And now here in the real world, when working-class Indonesians adopt that symbol in protest — not even violently, just by putting it on their trucks, on their front yards, on their cars, flown atop mountains and volcanoes, etc — the state starts echoing the exact same paranoia we see in the story. The same language. The same scapegoating. The same absurd claims that any challenge to the hierarchy must be criminal, foreign-funded, or anarchist.

It’s actually impressive, the level of irony involved in banning a flag that literally represents resistance to authoritarian overreach because you think it represents resistance to authoritarian overreach.

This isn’t about a flag. It’s about power — and who’s allowed to speak against it. It’s about fear — not of pirates, but of symbols that resonate. It’s about the ruling class realizing that a bunch of truck drivers with anime decals are suddenly more culturally relevant than their entire media machine.

In One Piece, the Jolly Roger is a symbol of freedom, loyalty, self determination, and righteous rebellion. It flies over ships that break chains and challenge tyrants. In Indonesia, it was flown by people tired of being silenced, manipulated, gaslit, and taken advantage of, and now the government wants to treat them like enemies of the state.

If that’s not the most perfect, painful parallel between fiction and reality, I don’t know what is.

So go ahead. Ban the flag. Call in intelligence briefings. Threaten legal action. But just know, you’ve officially cast yourself in the role of the very villains this generation grew up learning to resist.

The funniest things out of this? Vice President Gibran wore a Jolly Roger pin during an election debate last year (while also wearing a Naruto inspired denim jacket) and there is a parody version of the flag using the sideways logo of Indonesia’s 80th anniversary of the Independence Day declaration. Because it really does work and drives home the point much further.

By the way, Deputy Home Minister Bima Arya said nobody is banning the flag (never mind that the parliament leaders are rushing to ban it and demanding law enforcement to act against those flying the flag) and people are still free to fly it as a form of expression. When the government can’t even get their messaging right, nobody should surprised that people are doing what they do.

Apple’s billion dollar Indonesian drama

The Apple investment saga in Indonesia highlights the tension between government ambitions, expectations, and the realities of global business strategies.


Tirto published an article about what’s happening with the Apple investment story in Indonesia with quotes and statements from government officials and analysts. It wouldn’t be the Indonesian government if it didn’t generate drama out of foreign relations or commercial arrangements worthy of a telenovela.

A few things about this drama. Apple has yet to deposit or realize the last $14 million of its $100 million investment commitment made in 2016. It’s chump change for the company but necessary to unlock the permit for the latest iPhones and end the sales ban which the government enacted last year because of it. Only Apple knows definitively why they haven’t delivered on this. Meanwhile there’s been no update on the status of the Bali Apple Academy, announced by Tim Cook in April on his visit to the country. This fourth Academy in the country is likely to be part of the unrealized investment.

Indonesia has also been on Apple’s sales performance radar for a few years now having posted consecutive quarterly sales increases and mentioned specifically during multiple financial calls, so it’s in Apple’s best interest to keep the momentum going. The country makes roughly 50 million Android phones a year mainly for the domestic market, and 85% of phone imports in 2023, or 2.3 million of them, worth around $2 billion, were iPhones. The government is keen to reduce this foreign spending by getting Apple to make phones locally.

Armed with this information and situation, the Indonesian government decided to increase pressure on the company to make good on their promise and weaponised it to force them to eventually offer an investment worth a billion dollars late last year.

Political ego meets business reality

Expecting companies to invest in Indonesia just because they’re doing well in sales ignores the realities of running a sustainable business. Sure, it’s fair to want businesses to contribute to the markets they profit from, but investments can’t be driven by sales numbers alone. They need to make sense, whether it’s about supply chains, regulations, or long-term viability. Pressuring companies to invest without considering these factors often leads to rushed, unsustainable decisions that end up costing everyone in the long run.

That said, there’s room for a balanced approach. Instead of tying investments directly to sales, Indonesia could focus on creating conditions that make investing worthwhile, like improving infrastructure, offering clear incentives, and ensuring regulatory stability. This way, companies can contribute meaningfully without being forced into decisions that don’t align with their business goals. Fair contributions are important, but they should come from partnerships built on mutual benefit, not pressure. Otherwise, it’s just a short-term fix with a long-term price tag.

Apple’s Vietnamese success

Indonesian officials and analysts love to compare Apple’s meager investment in the country with the $16 billion Apple already spent in Vietnam since 2019. The company has 26 suppliers and 28 factories in the country as of 2022 and they announced in April that they will spend much more.

Apple didn’t invest in Vietnam because the market loves the iPhone so much, they’be been investing for years and each time increasing their commitment because the government offer attractive investment opportunities and incentives, provide a stable and consistent environment for businesses, deliver the necessary labor force, and ensure long term investment and production sustainability and security despite political upheavals. Not to mention the factories are mostly located near China which allows them to maintain a streamlined supply chain operation. Indonesia doesn’t have that advantage.

Vietnamese mobile developers also took up the Apple platforms because they saw opportunities, not because they were pushed or coaxed into the platforms. They didn’t need an Apple Academy to get developers going. Most Indonesian developers and companies only see opportunities based on local sales numbers and market size. They don’t see beyond the domestic market. That’s why it was a struggle to find quality Mac and iOS apps and developers from Indonesia before the Academies opened.

By the way

The article also mentioned about the Ministry of Industries spokesperson saying that Apple submitted their investment proposal over WhatsApp. It sounds like the government wants to shame Apple for sending such an important document over a chat app but the country runs almost entirely on WhatsApp. Comms within and across government ministries and agencies are done almost exclusively on the platform, with letterhead documents for official records.

What are the chances that they sent it that way because they were told to submit the document ASAP and the paper doc would follow after, and that they haven’t managed to schedule the meeting with the Ministries because November and December are holiday months for the company? I mean, if it’s that important, Tim Cook could get a few execs to drop their holiday plans and make the meeting but it seems that the urgency of this deal has yet to reach that critical level.

Indonesia 2045: Between Dreams and Reality

A personal take on potential, promise, paradox, and pragmatism

Growing up in Indonesia, I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard the phrase “future superpower.” It’s a narrative that’s been woven into our national fabric, a story we tell ourselves about our destiny. As we approach 2045, our centennial of independence, this narrative has taken on new urgency. But we’ve watched years of grand visions collide with stubborn realities, so you can’t be hopeful about this country without a healthy dose of skepticism, probably much more than you might think.

Let’s talk about numbers first, because they tell an interesting story. By 2045, we’re projected to be home to 324-326 million people, up from today’s 284 million. Our GDP per capita could nearly triple from $4,900 to somewhere between $12,000-15,000 or optimistically, above $20,000 as set out by the government in their Digital Indonesia Vision 2045. The middle class could expand from roughly half the population to nearly 80%. These aren’t just numbers, they represent millions of individual dreams, aspirations, and potential futures.

But here’s where it gets complicated.

The Promise and the Paradox

Indonesia in 2024 is a study in contrasts. We’re a nation where gleaming skyscrapers rise above Jakarta’s perpetually flooded streets, where digital payments are ubiquitous yet basic infrastructure remains patchy, where tech unicorns coexist with traditional markets. Our youth are increasingly global in outlook while remaining deeply rooted in local traditions. It’s these contrasts that make both our potential and our challenges so fascinating.

The good news is substantial. Our digital transformation is real and accelerating. Barring any technological or societal collapse, practically everyone would have access to to the internet by 2045. Our demographic dividend provides a workforce that could power decades of growth. The country’s strategic location between the Pacific and Indian Oceans positions us perfectly for a time where maritime trade routes are increasingly crucial.

But, and there’s always a but, the challenges are equally substantial.

The Reality Check

Corruption isn’t just a governance issue, it’s a cultural challenge that has proven remarkably resistant to reform. Our corruption perception index, measured by Transparency International, had gone from 34 in 2014 to 34 in 2023. To be fair, it hadn’t been flat, in fact it went up by the end of Jokowi’s first term to 40, which is a good thing, but it fell back to 34 in 2022 and stayed there, while in terms of ranking we fell five spots. In 20 years, who knows where it will be, because it’s such a deeply rooted problem. Regional disparities remain stark as what’s true for Jakarta isn’t true for Bandung or Medan, let alone Denpasar, Pontianak, or anywhere else in the archipelago, and the gap isn’t closing as quickly as it needs to be.

The environmental challenges are particularly daunting. Rising sea levels threaten our coastal cities, especially our main cities like Jakarta and Surabaya. Deforestation continues despite commitments to the contrary. Our renewable energy transition, while accelerating from 12% to a projected 30-35% by 2045, may not be fast enough to meet climate challenges.

The Global Stage

This is where things get really interesting. By 2045, the global order will have shifted dramatically. China and India will likely be the world’s largest economies. The Indo-Pacific region will be the center of global economic gravity. Where does Indonesia fit in this new world?

Our potential role is significant. As the unofficial leader of ASEAN, a G20 member, a BRICS partner, and the world’s largest Muslim-majority democracy, our diplomatic leverage ought to count for something, more significantly than it is right now. Our economy could be the world’s 4th or 5th largest by 2045. Our cultural influence, from cuisine to creative industries, is growing.

But here’s the cynical part: we’ve heard all this before. The question isn’t about potential, we’ve always had that, we are the sleeping Asian tiger after all. The question is about execution.

The Balancing Act

Our foreign policy challenges exemplify this complexity. We’re navigating between China and the US, between regional leadership and domestic development, between economic sovereignty and global integration. We’re trying to be everyone’s friend while advancing our own interests, a challenging diplomatic dance that will only get more complex.

By 2045, Indonesia could be:

  • A regional power with global influence
  • A key player in global supply chains
  • A leader in environmental and climate diplomacy
  • A cultural and religious bridge between East and West

Or we could be:

  • Still struggling with basic governance issues
  • Caught in the middle-income trap
  • Vulnerable to climate change and environmental degradation
  • Left behind in the global technology race

The Hope and the Hurdle

What makes me cautiously optimistic? The resilience that’s evident. The youth’s entrepreneurial spirit. The way we’ve maintained a semblance of unity despite diversity that would tear many nations apart. Our ability to adapt and evolve while maintaining our core identity.

What keeps me up at night? The persistence of old problems. The way corruption seems to adapt faster than anti-corruption measures. The environmental clock that’s ticking ever louder. The risk that we might miss our demographic dividend window while we’re still sorting out basic educational challenges.

Looking Forward

By 2045, if I’m still around, I’ll be old enough to have seen this entire journey unfold. Will we look back at this moment as the turning point where we finally converted potential into reality? Or will we still be talking about being a “future” superpower?

The truth probably lies somewhere in between. We’re likely to see significant progress, higher incomes, better infrastructure, more global influence. But we’re also likely to face continued challenges with governance, inequality, and environmental sustainability.

The Personal Stakes

This isn’t just about national statistics or global rankings. It’s about the kind of future we’re creating for the next generation. It’s about whether my kids will have to leave the country to find opportunities, or whether they’ll be able to build their dreams right here.

The Indonesia of 2045 won’t be a utopia. But it doesn’t need to be. It just needs to be better, more just, more sustainable, more prosperous, than today. It’s certainly achievable but my skepticism tells me it’s not going to be what it needs to be. I mean, ten years ago we all had expected so much more under Jokowi and yet here we are with a middle class crunch and facing further economic challenges.

The country is not going to be the superpower some dream of, never will. But it needs to be something perhaps more valuable, a nation that has found its own path to progress, balancing tradition with modernity, economic growth with sustainability, global influence with local wisdom.

That’s a future some people think they’re working to achieve while others are seemingly working to ensure something else happens.

A Final Thought

We need to stop thinking about Indonesia as a “future” superpower and start thinking about it as a present responsibility. The future isn’t something that happens to us, it’s something we build, decision by decision, day by day.

We’ll definitely not get everything right and will certainly face setbacks and challenges, and as always, the country isn’t defined by its challenges but by its response to those challenges.

Funnily enough when you look back, how the country responded to challenges will not be enough and will instead predictably stunt its own growth because what is disappointment if not Indonesian politicians and their lack of willingness to put aside personal greed over national gain? Not to mention the seeds of conflicts that seem to be consistently sowed. 

Will the country grow and get better? I mean look at the progress that’s happened over the last 20 years. We’ve got better infrastructure, strong economic growth, improved social welfare, but corruption, inequality, and institutional fragility continue to hinder progres. Our democracy keeps regressing and there are active efforts within the government and among the people ourselves, to return the country into authoritarianism and take away people’s rights.

Golden Indonesia by 2045? Tell ‘em they’re dreaming.

Indonesia’s big tech dream among broken systems

Bloomberg has a piece criticizing the way the Indonesian government has forced Apple to invest a billion dollars and make a commitment to build a factory or two in the country.

Using a protectionist playbook to get companies to build factories could end up sidelining Southeast Asia’s largest economy when neighbors are rolling out the red carpet for investors who are relocating from China ahead of Donald Trump’s potential tariffs, analysts said.

What Indonesian policymakers, officials, and ultranationalists refuse to acknowledge isn’t just the shortsightedness of protectionist policies, but the recklessness of enforcing them without the infrastructure to support a modern tech manufacturing ecosystem.

They cling to the illusion that forcing tech giants to build products locally is enough, ignoring the fact that manufacturing doesn’t happen in isolation, it’s an interconnected ecosystem dependent on robust infrastructure, not just financial sticks and carrots.

The Indonesian government isn’t just using the wrong policy, they’re operating with the wrong mindset entirely. They also haven’t squared the collapsing textile industry and the falling demand in the auto industry with their tech ambitions. Apple manufacture devices for the global market regardless of their origin while Indonesia’s manufacturing industries tend to be dominated by domestic sales.

Local content requirements cover a range of industries, from cars to medical devices. Together with decades-old problems such as red tape, high taxes and a less productive workforce, Indonesia’s manufacturing growth has slowed to a crawl.

In contrast, neighbors like Vietnam and India are offering tax incentives, swift approvals and the freedom to source their components from across their global supply chains, Gupta of the Center for Indonesian Policy Studies said.

That makes them attractive for companies looking to produce for export and explains why Apple can invest a much larger $15 billion in Vietnam despite the nation having a smaller domestic market than Indonesia, he said.

Indonesia, the waking giant, is still scrolling through TikTok in bed

In 2016, Elizabeth Pisani described Indonesia as a “the biggest invisible thing on the planet,” in The Guardian. She signaled that the country is transitioning from decades of quiet development to a new phase of urban and economic ambition. However, looking back now, it seems Indonesia might still be stretching in bed, scrolling through TikTok rather than fully “awake.” While some progress has been made, many of the issues Pisani raised, fragmented development, infrastructure gaps, and uneven growth, still linger, preventing Indonesia from realizing its full potential as a global player.

Indonesia has seen improvements since 2016, especially in urban centers like Jakarta, where expanded transit systems and toll roads have alleviated some congestion (not enough but it’s getting there) and spurred economic activity. Additionally, the digital economy has grown rapidly, with Indonesia becoming one of the world’s most active social media markets.

Yet much of this digital growth reflects consumer habits rather than productive innovation, as Indonesia’s youth engage heavily on platforms like TikTok, which showcase Indonesia’s digital enthusiasm but don’t necessarily build the high-value tech sector Indonesia needs for long-term prosperity.

With a young, dynamic population, the country could be investing in a more diverse digital economy, one that includes tech innovation, sustainable energy, and high-value exports.

However, the once thriving ride hailing and food delivery tech giant Gojek, which was just launched at the time of Pisani’s article, is now struggling to keep up with competition as it wound down operations in Vietnam and Thailand, and sold ecommerce giant Tokopedia to ByteDance, barely two years after their celebrated merger and IPO. Layoffs in the larger tech sector have reached thousands in two years.

Another significant change since Pisani’s article is the rise of controversial former general and Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto to the presidency. His election represents a pivot in leadership style and direction. Prabowo’s popularity has been partly fueled by his endearing public persona, and he has promised continuity with former President Joko Widodo’s infrastructure agenda while adding a new layer of military discipline and assertiveness.

Prabowo has committed to ambitious goals, including an 8% annual economic growth rate, free school meals, and a more proactive foreign policy stance to increase Indonesia’s global influence. In fact, he sent Foreign Minister Sugiono to the BRICS Conference in Russia, within days of his appointment, to express intention to fully join the economic bloc. But the challenges Pisani highlighted, geographic disparities, underdeveloped human capital, and regulatory inconsistencies, still constrain Indonesia’s aspirations. President Prabowo has ordered a full review of the laws to align them with his grand plan to accelerate Indonesia’s development.

Prabowo’s pledges are bold, but achieving them may require more than infrastructure and social programs. The economy remains heavily reliant on resource extraction and low-cost labor, making it vulnerable to global market fluctuations and competition from faster-moving neighbors like Vietnam. Educational and labor inequalities persist, and while Prabowo’s initiatives may address immediate needs, sustainable growth will require deeper investment in human capital and technology-driven industries, something that the previous government was already working on.

In short, Indonesia’s journey from “invisible giant” to a true economic powerhouse appears far from complete. Pisani’s vision of a “waking” Indonesia might still be accurate, but without substantial shifts in human development and innovation, the nation risks staying in a kind of semi-conscious state. If Prabowo’s administration hopes to fulfill the dream of a “Golden Indonesia 2045,” which envisions the country as a high-income, self-sustaining economic powerhouse, now is the time to get up and go to work.

Exploited, Extorted, and Erased: Indonesia’s Struggle Against Dutch Historical Revision

I’ve never considered myself a nationalist, but there’s one thing that has been tugging at me for decades: the Dutch colonial legacy in Indonesia. It’s a complex history that continues to resonate and remains unresolved to this day.

Let’s talk about the elephant in the room – the price of Indonesian independence. In the 1950s, Indonesia had to pay billions of guilders to the Netherlands just to secure full sovereignty, about 4.5 billion. It’s a staggering sum that apparently had a far greater impact on the Dutch economy than the much-lauded Marshall Plan. Yet, when the Dutch discuss their post-war recovery, it’s all about that American aid. The audacity to erase the role of Indonesia in the post World War II reconstruction and redevelopment of the Netherlands.

As if you’re not aware, here’s a bitter pill to swallow: part of that independence payment went towards covering the cost of weapons the Dutch used against Indonesians during the struggle for freedom. A member of the Indonesian delegation at the Round Table Conference in 1949 escaped death in Jogjakarta by a Dutch bomb that went through a window he was standing by. It’s a cruel twist that still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

From the article linked above:

The Dutch delegation firmly started negotiations with the requirement that the entire Dutch Indian debt of 6.5 billion guilders should be transferred to Indonesia, including the cost of all recent military actions that had estimated to have killed a hundred thousand Indonesians. The original draft law states that the ‘measures taken to restore order and peace (…) were (were) in the interest of Indonesia’.


It must have been a strange sensation for the Indonesian delegation members. Mohammed Hatta was still imprisoned during the so-called ‘Second Police Action’ in 1948 and Dr. Leimena, one of the Republican delegation members, had seen a Dutch bomb arrive through the window during the same action in Yogyakarta and managed to jump into a space under the stairs just in time. Now they were presented with the bill of that Dutch bomb.

And let’s not forget the ongoing dispute over our Independence Day. The Dutch government stubbornly refuses to legally recognize August 17, 1945, insisting instead on December 1949 after the conclusion of the Round Table Conference at The Hague. It’s as if our declaration and struggle meant nothing until they decided to acknowledge it, a power that the colonists insists on maintaining because they can’t bear to witness their former slaves achieving full independence.

But here’s the crux of the matter: the Netherlands’ current prosperity is built on a foundation of colonial exploitation. For over three centuries, they extracted wealth from the Indonesian archipelago, shaping their nation’s trajectory at our expense. This historical debt remains largely unacknowledged and unaddressed.

Last year’s “acknowledgment” of the Independence Day by the Dutch government? It’s a step that carries no legal weight and falls short of true reconciliation. The Dutch government even stated that it has no legal relevance and it does not change the date for the United Nations. It’s high time for the Netherlands to face a reckoning with history.

Too many people aren’t aware of this situation between the Netherlands and Indonesia. I’m not satisfied until there is a full recognition, a genuine acknowledgment of the past and its lasting impacts and a full reparation paid by the Netherlands to Indonesia even if it means collapsing their economy because that’s what the Dutch deserve. They don’t deserve a single thing that they enjoy today because everything they have was built upon the exploitation of an entire archipelago wider than the width of the continental United States. Until that happens, this chapter of our shared history remains painfully unresolved.

Why is it important that the Netherlands, the United Nations, and any other country and organization recognize this date? The official recognition of 17 August 1945 is an important milestone as part of the decolonization process to acknowledge the loss of power and authority of the Netherlands over the former colony. 

This refusal is the same as if the UK refuse to acknowledge July 4, 1776 as the American Independence Day because the revolutionary war was still happening until 1783, and will only recognize September 3, 1783 because that’s the date of the Treaty of Paris. Indonesia was still at war with the Netherlands until 1949 but we declared our independence in 1945. Tell me how that’s a different case.

It’s important that former colonists fully detach themselves of all their power and authority to disabuse the notion that they still have some level of control over the status of the independent nation.

So while I may not wave flags or lead protests, this is an issue that strikes a very deep chord. It’s not just about the past; it’s about respect, justice, and setting the historical record straight. And that is something worth speaking up for.

Further reading

Forced atonement? Dutch apologies and compensation for colonial era rights violations – Indonesia at Melbourne

Dutch government apologises to Indonesia for war abuses, but knowledge of atrocities is nothing new

How the Netherlands systematically used extreme violence in Indonesia and concealed this afterwards – Leiden University

Archipelago of Death: The Brutality of Japanese and Dutch Counterinsurgency Operations in Indonesia

Uproar about De Oost: ‘Westerling is a war criminal, that is my truth’

Angry Indonesian Internet Users Create Virtual Roadblocks on Google Maps in Response to Mob Murder

Indonesian internet users have flooded Google Maps with virtual roadblocks on nearly every road and street in the Sukolilo district, Pati, Central Java.

This digital protest comes in the wake of a tragic incident where a mob of local residents set fire to a rental car owner and his vehicle, resulting in his death. The victim was reportedly attempting to retrieve the car from suspected car thieves when the mob attacked. Three other men who accompanied the deceased victim were also assaulted and are in a coma in a hospital.

Several rental car business owners have come forward, revealing that they have long blacklisted rentals to individuals carrying Pati-issued identification cards due to concerns about vehicle theft. They claim that the regency is widely known within the industry as a hub for stolen motor vehicles, with many vehicles in the area lacking license plates.

Sukolilo subdistrict head Andrik Sulaksono rejected the allegations, saying the area is not a fencing hub and that it was all said by angry netizens reacting to the news of the murder.

Until recently, law enforcement authorities have reportedly taken little action in response to suspicions and public reports of vehicle theft in the region. This apparent lack of action has prompted some angry Indonesians to resort to vigilante justice.

The incident has sparked outrage among Indonesian internet users, leading to the virtual roadblock campaign on Google Maps as a form of protest and a call for increased attention to the issue of vehicle theft and the need for improved law enforcement in the area.

Police have apprehended ten suspects with evidence belonging to the victims found at their homes, and seized 27 motorcycles and 6 cars with fake registration papers, from one property.

Composite image of one neighborhood in Sukolilo showing virtual roadblocks on Google Maps on nearly every road.

Mr. Prime Minister, your outsized business delegation to the B20 conference shows that you place a very high value in the relationships between our two nations thanks to the remarkable opportunities you identify in this country and the region.

At the same time, Australia is also a very attractive tourism and education destination for many in this country and the region. So how about you make it so much easier for us Southeast Asians in general, to be able to visit your wonderful country and spend our hard earned money there as well?

You can easily bring your products over here for people to purchase and we can equally easily send people over there to spend money and enjoy what your country has to offer without having to endure these high friction barriers that you currently maintain, which had been placed by your predecessors.

We’ve always made it super easy for every one of your citizens to spend time in Bali and the rest of Indonesia almost as if it’s a domestic destination for Aussies, so it’s only fair for your government to extend the exact same travel facilities and affordances for us Indonesians to make our way to Australia. How about that, eh?

I CAN’T EVEN!!