Why Indonesia must reject the Arab-Israel normalisation wave

In recent years, the Middle East has witnessed a major diplomatic shift marked by a wave of normalisation agreements between Israel and several Arab nations. Sparked by the Abraham Accords in 2020, countries like the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco have established official ties with Israel. While some celebrate these agreements as milestones for peace and economic cooperation, they have also sparked deep skepticism, especially among those committed to justice for the Palestinian people.

Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim-majority democracy and a vital voice of the Global South, has stood firm in refusing to recognise or normalise relations with Israel as long as a just and lasting solution to the Palestinian question remains absent. This principled stance reflects not only Indonesia’s commitment to international law and human rights but also its moral leadership in the Muslim world and the broader international community.

These normalisation agreements were driven primarily by political and strategic interests, notably under pressure from the Trump administration. Yet they have failed to address the root cause of the conflict: Israel’s decades-long occupation of Palestinian territories, including the West Bank and East Jerusalem, as well as its blockade of the Gaza Strip. Israel’s latest military assault on Gaza, launched in October 2023, has killed tens of thousands of civilians, obliterated infrastructure, and triggered accusations of war crimes by various human rights organizations.

Despite these atrocities, countries that have normalised ties with Israel have largely remained silent or offered only lukewarm criticisms. In practice, normalization has emboldened Israel, allowing it to act with impunity under the cover of regional diplomatic protection.

In contrast, Indonesia’s foreign policy remains consistent and rooted in justice. Since its independence in 1945, Indonesia has opposed all forms of colonialism and has consistently supported the right of peoples to self-determination. Its constitution, foreign policy doctrine, and public sentiment are aligned with the Palestinian struggle. A brief proposal by President Abdurrahman Wahid in the early 2000s to reconsider ties with Israel was met with strong resistance from civil society, religious leaders, and parliament.

More recently, President Prabowo Subianto reaffirmed Indonesia’s position, stating that normalisation with Israel is contingent on full recognition of Palestinian rights. In a press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron, Prabowo made clear that Indonesia would only consider diplomatic relations with Israel once a sovereign Palestinian state is recognized. His statement reinforces Indonesia’s longstanding support for a two-state solution as the only path to a just peace.

Abandoning this position would carry serious risks. First, Indonesia would lose credibility as a principled actor on global issues. As an active member of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the Non-Aligned Movement, Indonesia is respected for its steadfast defense of justice and human rights. Normalising ties with Israel while the occupation persists would be seen as a betrayal of these values.

Second, it could provoke strong domestic backlash, particularly from Indonesia’s Muslim majority, who view the Palestinian cause as a moral and religious obligation. Third, such a move would send the wrong message to other Muslim countries and to Israel itself: that diplomatic rewards can be obtained without ending the occupation or respecting international law.

Indonesia’s commitment to Palestine is also backed by international legal frameworks. United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 call for Israel’s withdrawal from occupied territories and mutual recognition of all states in the region, including Palestine. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the transfer of an occupier’s civilian population into occupied territory, rendering Israeli settlements illegal. In 2004, the International Court of Justice ruled that Israel’s separation wall in the West Bank violates international law.

By continuing to reject normalisation, Indonesia upholds these legal principles and the universal application of human rights. More than that, Indonesia can play a proactive role in shaping a just peace in the region. Rather than following the tide of short-term diplomacy, it should lead efforts within the OIC and the United Nations to push for a ceasefire in Gaza, end the blockade, and revive genuine peace talks based on a two-state solution.

Indonesia should also continue providing humanitarian assistance to Palestinians and support international investigations into war crimes and violations of humanitarian law. With its moral clarity and neutral stance, Indonesia is well-positioned to serve as a mediator in future peace processes, especially as trust in Western-led diplomacy continues to erode.

This stance also reflects the voice of the Global South. In recent UN General Assembly votes calling for a ceasefire and humanitarian access in Gaza, nations across Asia, Africa, and Latin America overwhelmingly supported Palestine, while the U.S. and its allies became increasingly isolated. This suggests the world is not fully aligned with the normalisation narrative. Rather, it is seeking leadership grounded in justice, legality, and dignity over transactional politics.

In conclusion, Indonesia’s rejection of the Arab-Israel normalisation wave is not an act of diplomatic defiance, but a principled resistance. It reflects a deep commitment to justice for Palestinians, to international legal norms, and to the moral values embedded in the nation’s identity. Normalisation without justice is not peace, it is complicity in injustice. As long as occupation persists and Palestinian rights are denied, Indonesia must remain a voice of conscience in a world too often tempted to look away.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.