Written by: Pelangi Retta Gyani Sihombing Staff of Research and Development

Indonesia Gelap (dark Indonesia) has emerged as a popular tagline symbolizing the deepening crisis of Indonesia. The term encapsulates fears of democratic backsliding, weakened rule of law, and a general decline in governance and legal justice in the country (Hadjar, 2025). Triggered by controversial moves such as Presidential Instruction No. 1/2025 – an austerity policy blamed for cutting educational budgets to fund the newly established free school lunch program – many Indonesians, especially students, have voiced their uneasiness through this action. Social media hashtags like #IndonesiaGelap and #KaburAjaDulu (“just escape for now”) underscores a sentiment that the future is alarming, and half-jokingly contemplates leaving the country. In essence, Indonesia Gelap signifies a crisis of confidence in the nation’s direction amid democratic erosion and governance failures (Khozen, 2025).

Image 1. Civilian protest during the “Indonesia Gelap” movement.
Source: Tempo

From an international studies perspective, this phenomenon is not merely a domestic concern; it carries significant international implications. Indonesia had long been seen as a stable democracy in Southeast Asia with considerable soft power since 1998. Even though Indonesia’s soft power is still emerging and evolving, it is often characterised by its image as a democratic, Muslim-majority nation that upholds Pancasila values. Rather than relying on military or economic dominance, Indonesia frequently highlights its peaceful diplomacy, pluralism, and post-1998 democratic reforms to gain international recognition and respect (Intentilia, 2025).

Now, however, observers warn that Indonesia’s internal turmoil could tarnish its global standing and alter its regional dynamics (Antlöv, 2025). Issues of democratic backsliding and legal injustice at home can spill over into foreign policy, affect international cooperation, and change how Indonesia is perceived on the world stage. Thus, Indonesia Gelap can be analysed as both a national crisis and an international concern. The following sections examine how this governance decline is eroding Indonesia’s soft power, undermining economic confidence, and raising alarms among international partners and human rights advocates.

Eroding Soft Power and International Image

Indonesia’s democratic image and soft power are under strain due to what many see as a turn toward authoritarianism. After the fall of Suharto in 1998, Indonesia began transitioning into a democracy. This period saw more political parties, active civil society groups, and space for marginalised communities to speak up, however now Indonesia is witnessing the emerging oligarchy and militarian authoritarianism, silencing the voices of its people (Gomez, 2024). Public criticism is often brushed aside rather than addressed, as exemplified by the government’s response to the Indonesia Gelap student protests against education budget cuts. The administration justified the cuts on grounds of “fiscal efficiency” instead of engaging with protesters’ concerns (Fathana, 2025). Such indifference to civil society has dented Indonesia’s credibility as an inclusive, democratic state.

Internationally, Indonesia’s soft power has been built on its reputation as a moderate Muslim-majority democracy and a leader in ASEAN. This reputation is reflected in initiatives such as the Bali Democracy Forum, which promotes democratic dialogue in the Asia-Pacific region. Additionally, Indonesia’s commitment to Islamic solidarity is evident in its support for Palestine; for instance, in 2017, then-Minister of Religious Affairs Lukman Hakim Saifuddin emphasised the nation’s unwavering support for Palestinian independence, stating, “the government has tried its best so Palestine can achieve its rights and independence”. Such actions underscore Indonesia’s strategic use of its religious and democratic credentials to enhance its influence on the international stage (AFP, 2017).

Now, that reputation is faltering. Legislation pushed through in this climate has raised further concern. In March 2025, a controversial revision of the Military Law (RUU TNI) was passed, quietly expanding the number of civilian agencies that active military officers can occupy  (Antlöv, 2025). While on paper, the changes were subtle, critics fear it signals a revival of the dual-function doctrine (Dwifungsi ABRI) that granted the armed forces broad political roles during Suharto’s authoritarian rule. Even former President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, himself a retired general, warned against “repeating the past that has been corrected by history,” urging respect for democracy and freedom (Setiawan, 2025). 

Such warnings highlight how Indonesia’s current trajectory is showing parallels to its own authoritarian past, and even drawing comparisons with the present day of Myanmar’s military-dominated governance, Tatmadaw (Al-Amin & Chandni, 2021). Although Indonesia’s situation differs from Myanmar’s outright military junta, the erosion of checks and balances in Indonesia has prompted observers to caution that Southeast Asia’s largest democracy could be on a similar slope towards authoritarianism if these trends continue. This reputational damage has concrete implications: Indonesia’s voice in promoting democratic norms regionally and globally is weakened, and its moral authority and legitimacy in a forum like ASEAN (where it has championed a response to Myanmar’s crisis) is now in question. Add to that the incumbent President Prabowo’s background in condoning the invasion to East Timor and the forced disappearances of political activists. All of these shows that Indonesia Gelap has dimmed the country’s international image, reducing its soft power and ability to influence global norms and policies.

Declining Foreign Investment Confidence

The domestic turmoil signalled by Indonesia Gelap is also undermining economic confidence, particularly among foreign investors. The combination of abrupt policy shifts and the spectre of authoritarian governance has made investors skittish. A telling indicator was the performance of Indonesia’s stock market amid the unrest. On April 8, 2025, following weeks of protests and an extended holiday, the Jakarta Composite Index (IHSG) plummeted over 9% in a single morning, triggering an automatic trading halt. This was the steepest single-day decline since the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, making Indonesia the worst-performing market in Asia-Pacific at that moment. Analysts attributed the plunge to a mix of global factors and domestic jitters – notably the “Indonesia Gelap” protests had sown fears of instability, prompting panicked sell-offs. Local media even dubbed the stock crash “Bursa Saham Indonesia Gelap,” a play on the movement’s name, underscoring the link between the political crisis and market turmoil (Yudhistira, 2025).

The sight of thousands of protesters in Jakarta and other cities, some clashing violently with police, also fuels a narrative of instability that can dampen tourism and investor interest. In the weeks following the budget cuts and military law saga, Indonesia’s overall risk premium rose; the rupiah currency wobbled alongside the stock index as foreign funds pulled out capital. Even though economic fundamentals remain relatively strong—such as stable GDP growth, manageable inflation, and consistent foreign exchange reserves—these indicators alone are not enough to reassure investors when political uncertainty and social unrest dominate the public narrative. Perception of governance and rule of law often outweigh raw economic data in shaping investor confidence, especially in emerging markets like Indonesia. A country perceived as sliding into authoritarianism or beset by unrest will find it harder to attract the foreign investments needed for development. Indeed, the 9% IHSG drop is a dramatic barometer of this lost confidence. Thus, Indonesia Gelap has real economic costs, undermining the international business community’s trust in Indonesia as a stable and predictable place to invest.

Human Rights and Diplomatic Fallout

Indonesia’s internal crackdowns and democratic backsliding are increasingly drawing global diplomatic and human rights concerns. As the Indonesia Gelap demonstrations gained momentum, international media from across the world, from Malaysia and Singapore to Hong Kong and Italy (Tempo, 2025). Foreign news outlets highlighted the sight of students in black clothing flooding city streets and the symbolism of “Dark Indonesia” as a cry against authoritarian tendencies. This widespread coverage has put Indonesia under an international spotlight, with many abroad expressing solidarity with Indonesian civil society. For example, The Straits Times and Taiwan Plus reported on the rallies as a serious backlash to Prabowo’s policies, noting fears that Indonesia’s democracy is backsliding (Sood, 2025). Such reporting shapes global perceptions and has begun to tarnish Indonesia’s previously positive international image. No longer is the country solely seen as a thriving emerging economy or a model Muslim democracy; it is now also seen as a place where students are tear-gassed for protesting and where opposition voices are stifled.

Diplomatically, Indonesia’s allies and partners are taking note. While foreign governments have been cautious in official statements, concern is evident. International human rights organizations have been less restrained in their responses. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have criticized the arrests of protesters and urged Jakarta to respect civil liberties. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) issued a sharp rebuke after reports that police in Surabaya beat and harassed journalists covering the protests. In one incident, officers forced reporters to delete footage of clashes — a clear violation of press freedom that CPJ condemned as “assaults on the free press” needing to stop immediately (CPJ, 2025). Such incidents raise “red flags” globally about Indonesia’s commitment to democratic norms. They also risk diplomatic repercussions: countries that prioritize human rights may reconsider arms sales or security cooperation if Indonesian forces are seen abusing citizens. Western democracies have historically valued Indonesia as a partner balancing China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific, but that partnership presupposes a degree of shared values and stability. If Indonesia’s government continues to crack down on dissent (for instance, by detaining student leaders or using excessive force), it could face not only moral condemnation, but also the cooling of relations with nations that champion democratic governance.

Regionally, Indonesia’s trajectory poses a dilemma for ASEAN. As the largest member of ASEAN, Indonesia has often set the tone on regional issues and pushed initiatives like the “ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific”. However, its ability to lead on democracy and human rights (for example, in addressing the Myanmar coup crisis) is undermined if its own house is in disorder. Neighbouring countries are assessing closely. Some with authoritarian leanings might quietly approve of Jakarta’s hardline measures, but others fear regional instability. ASEAN’s principle of non-interference means direct criticism is unlikely, yet Indonesia’s legitimacy in ASEAN deliberations is undoubtedly weakened. Meanwhile, international observers worry that if Indonesia’s decline continues, it could embolden authoritarian actors elsewhere in the region, reversing democratic gains beyond its borders.

Conclusion

In an era of global interdependence, the decline of Indonesia’s domestic governance is no longer a contained national issue, but one that reverberates across its international relationships and standing. The Indonesia Gelap movement symbolises a deepening crisis in democracy, justice, and civil rights—issues that swiftly escalate into matters of international concern. A politically repressive Indonesia risks eroding trust with allies, deterring investors, and complicating its position in regional and global forums. The government now faces a critical juncture: whether to address the unrest by reopening civic space, ensuring accountability, and revisiting controversial policies, or to entrench repression, thereby isolating itself from the international community. 

President Prabowo’s response will shape Indonesia’s global trajectory as international partners monitor the situation closely, potentially linking bilateral cooperation to democratic benchmarks. Ultimately, Indonesia Gelap underscores that a nation’s global influence rests upon the strength of its domestic institutions; if Indonesia aspires to remain a regional leader and global player, it must reaffirm its commitment to democratic governance and the rule of law.

References

AFP. (2017). Turkey to open embassy in Occupied-al-Quds.The News International. Retrieved from https://www.thenews.com.pk/amp/257314

Al-Amin, & Chandni, R. B. (2021). Military rule in Myanmar: Through the landscape of authoritarian power consolidation. Regional Studies, 39(4), 14–46.

Antlöv, H., & Utrikespolitiska Institutet. (2025). UI report no. 1/2025. UI Publications.

Committee to Protect Journalists. (2025). CPJ condemns police abuse of journalists in Surabaya. CPJ. Retrieved from https://cpj.org/2025/03/several-journalists-attacked-while-covering-anti-military-protests-in-indonesia/

Fathana, H. (2025). Prabowo and Indonesia’s democratic crossroads. Australian Outlook. Retrieved from https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/prabowo-and-indonesias-democratic-crossroads/

Gomez, J. (Ed.). (2025). Eroding electoral integrity: Reasons for democratic backsliding in Southeast Asia. Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia. Retrieved from https://kyotoreview.org/issue-40/eroding-electoral-integrity/

Hadjar, A. F. (2025). Indonesia Gelap: Kabur aja dulu dalam perspektif hukum. Hukumonline. Retrieved from https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/indonesia-gelap–kabur-aja-dulu-dalam-perspektif-hukum-lt67c475a58fb1b/

Intentilia, A. A. M. (2025). “The Trajectory of Bali Democracy Forum: Indonesia’s Soft Power and Nation Branding”. Politicos: Jurnal Politik Dan Pemerintahan, 5(1), 45-56. https://doi.org/10.22225/politicos.5.1.2025.45-56 

Khozen, I. (2025). Indonesia Gelap: A public fear over a seized country. Fakultas Ilmu Administrasi Universitas Indonesia. Retrieved from https://fia.ui.ac.id/indonesia-gelap-a-public-fear-over-a-seized-country/

Setiawan, A. (2025, Maret 17). SBY: Jangan sampai TNI mengulangi masa lalu yang sudah dikoreksi sejarah. Liputan6.com. Retrieved from https://www.liputan6.com/news/read/5963151/sby-jangan-sampai-tni-mengulangi-masa-lalu-yang-sudah-dikoreksi-sejarah

Sood, A. (2025, February 26). Will the ‘Dark Indonesia’ protests against Prabowo’s austerity cuts escalate further? South China Morning Post. Retrieved from https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3300172/will-dark-indonesia-protests-against-prabowos-austerity-cuts-escalate-further

Tempo. (2025). Indonesia Gelap jadi sorotan media asing dari Hong Kong hingga Italia. Tempo.co. Retrieved from https://www.tempo.co/internasional/indonesia-gelap-jadi-sorotan-media-asing-dari-hongkong-hingga-italia-1209326

Yudhistira, B. (2025). Stock market plunge signals fading Indonesian economy. Asia Sentinel. Retrieved from https://www.asiasentinel.com/p/stock-market-plunge-signals-fading-indonesia-economy