The internal political economy of Indonesia influences its external posturing in an inseparable way. Domestically, state conduct in Indonesia is affected by social dynamics, class power combinations, and the formation of historical blocs. The foreign policy stance of Jakarta runs the risk of becoming a focal point for nationalist challenge. A strong motif in Indonesian political debate is sovereignty. Opposition parties, populist movements, as well as nationalist groups may weaponize the narrative claiming that closer contact with China threatens independence. Deeply rooted in colonial memories and fears of economic dependence, these narratives resonate with many. Nevertheless, benevolent nationalism masks a very deep socioeconomic reality that is characterized by unequal distributions of cost and gain resulting from strategic hedging. Closer ties to Beijing or Washington may be of significant benefit to elite sectors connected to transnational capital, infrastructure development, and defense industries. At the other end, broader societal groups bear burdens that includes; debt dependence, labor exploitation, and extraction of resources without corresponding benefits in welfare or political empowerment.

As a result, the autonomy that Indonesia wishes to preserve is thus challenged from within: is it the autonomy of the state apparatus and ruling classes, or an autonomy that reflects the aspirations of the larger population? Indonesian repositioning is in line with ASEAN's delicate consensus. Cohesiveness in ASEAN has historically been based upon member states’ capability to keep equidistance to external influences, with Indonesia anchoring this balance as the largest and most powerful ASEAN member. Whether it is accurate or not, today the perception that Jakarta leans toward Beijing could hamper ASEAN unity, sharpening divisions. And while Cambodia and Laos are deepening their economic ties with China, Vietnam and the Philippines are adopting a more open stance toward Washington. The risks are evident: ASEAN’s collective agency; the ability to operate as a regional balancer and a normative entrepreneur may be weakened, thereby transforming the association from a zone of strategic uncertainty into an arena of great power competition. Indonesia's decisions are not just national policies but an illustration of the country's national character which consequently impacts regional order structurally.

The strategic hedging of Indonesia clearly illustrates the fundamental conflict that strongly tends to exist between agency and structure in contemporary world politics. Jakarta attempts to act, negotiate, and also maintain autonomy, yet does so within a context of a historical conjuncture that is defined by the constriction of institutional venues that once allowed greater freedom. However, being historical constructs, structures are subject to change by social mobilization and as result they are not immutable. The critical question here is: whether Indonesia's hedging approach can generate sufficient transformative impetus to sustain and even strengthen regional pluralism, or whether on the other hand, it merely manages a decline into dependence under new hegemonic configurations.

The 2+2 discussion with China is not a destination, certainly not a final one. This moment inherently represents a part in a wider broader historical trajectory of a less hierarchical, more emancipatory regional order and an act of resistance against systemic enclosure. The trajectory of Indonesia today represents a fundamental truth about international relations: autonomy must be achieved and at the same continually be preserved; it is not a granted right. Strategic hedging serves not only as a very shrewd diplomatic tool but at the same time serves as a survival strategy within a global system that favors power concentration and penalizes divergence. Whether Indonesia becomes another example of an elite-mediated case of reliance or the case of an exemplary model of middle power resilience, will majorly depend on its ability to recognize this reality and act accordingly.

Note: The cover image accompanying this article was generated using artificial intelligence and is intended for illustrative purposes only.