Recent news stories have revealed that Indonesia may send some 20,000 soldiers – troops it claims have been trained to be peacekeepers – to Gaza. On paper, this might look like a contribution to regional stability. However, for the United States and for Israel, allowing Indonesian soldiers to deploy in Gaza would be a strategic mistake.
Indonesia does not recognize Israel, has never had diplomatic relations with Israel, and has consistently voted against Israel at the United Nations. The proposed deployment is not in the best interest of either the United States or Israel. The 20,000 Indonesian soldiers who have been supposedly trained to be peacekeepers in Gaza should stay home in Indonesia.
Indonesia’s government has publicly reaffirmed that there is no official relationship with Israel, and this position has remained unchanged for decades. Despite rare and unofficial contacts, Jakarta maintains a foreign-policy posture rooted in rejecting Israel’s legitimacy. It also has no embassy in Israel. This lack of diplomatic relations is not a technicality; it is a deliberate Indonesian policy that signals national opposition to Israel’s existence.
Indonesia diplomatically against Israel
In consistently voting against Jerusalem at the UN, often enthusiastically, Jakarta has supported resolutions condemning Israel for what it describes as an “unlawful occupation” of Palestinian territory. Indonesian officials publicly welcome UN resolutions calling for a full Israeli withdrawal and regularly state that Israel has no legitimate sovereignty in Palestinian-populated areas.
Indonesia has also condemned Knesset votes, reinforcing its long-standing pattern of hostility. These are not the votes or statements of a neutral nation capable of acting as an even-handed peacekeeping presence; they are the actions of a state that aligns diplomatically against Israel over and over again.
This all really matters when discussing the possible deployment of Indonesian troops into Gaza. Embedding soldiers from a country that refuses to recognize Israel, has no diplomatic ties with Israel, and consistently backs resolutions targeting Israel’s legitimacy introduces serious risks.
Peacekeepers must be trusted by all sides if they are to function effectively. Given Indonesia’s history, Israel cannot reasonably be expected to view these troops as neutral actors. Nor should the United States do so.
Legitimizes anti-Israel diplomacy
In October 2024, dramatic testimony revealed that Hezbollah terrorists captured by the IDF confirmed that they had paid members of UNIFIL (the UN Interim Force in Lebanon) to use their outposts and surveillance cameras along the border with Israel. What assurances are there that troops from a nation like Indonesia, when its citizens know full well that their government opposes Israel, would not similarly collaborate with Hamas?
There is also the practical question of what message the United States would send by supporting such a deployment. Washington consistently works to protect Israel’s security. Allowing troops from a nation that has taken every opportunity at the UN to oppose Israel would create an unnecessary contradiction in US policy.
It would legitimize Indonesia’s behavior: aggressive anti-Israel diplomacy paired with a sudden interest in placing thousands of soldiers in a territory vital to Israel’s security. Washington should be wary of giving political cover to states whose UN voting records consistently undermine US and Israeli interests.
Some might argue that Indonesia, as the world’s largest Muslim-majority country, could bring credibility or balance to peacekeeping in Gaza. Yet, Indonesia itself has made clear that even its hypothetical willingness to recognize Israel is conditional, based not on diplomacy or mutual respect but on Israel first recognizing an independent Palestinian state. That is not neutrality; it is a political ultimatum.
Other methods to help
Inserting troops from such a state into Gaza could lead to confusion, conflicting mandates, and serious security complications. Peacekeepers need to coordinate closely with the IDF in any post-conflict scenario. The introduction of a politically motivated military contingent would risk undermining Israel’s security and could embolden groups that oppose Israel’s right to defend itself.
If Indonesia wishes to contribute to humanitarian efforts in Gaza, it has many options: reconstruction aid, medical support, food distribution, or engineering assistance. These would be productive avenues that do not carry the political and military risks of placing 20,000 soldiers in the middle of a conflict zone adjacent to Israel.
The bottom line is clear. Indonesia is the wrong country to provide troops in Gaza. For the security of Israel, for the strategic interests of the United States, and for the prospects of genuine peace, the Indonesian soldiers should stay in Indonesia.
The writer is national chairman of Americans For A Safe Israel (AFSI), a leading pro-Israel advocacy and education organization. www.AFSI.org