In a Jakarta interview moment that felt less like diplomacy and more like disbelief, indonesia President Prabowo Subianto described himself as “surprised, ” “confused, ” and saddened by what he called the lack of “rationality” in the United States and Israel’s war on Iran. His words landed alongside a second, quieter admission: plans to deploy peacekeeping troops to Gaza under the Board of Peace have been temporarily postponed as tensions in the Middle East escalate.
What did Indonesia’s Prabowo say about the US-Israel war on Iran?
Prabowo said he did not see any “rationality” in the military campaign against Iran, calling it an “asymmetrical war” in which Iran may “just have to survive. ” He said he was “confused” and “saddened, ” framing the conflict as something that defies a clear logic of ends and means.
The conflict context he spoke about includes a major escalation: the United States and Israel launched what was described as their most ambitious attacks on Iran in decades on Feb 28, with Tehran responding by launching missiles towards other countries in the Gulf. Iran also claimed it had “ample evidence” that US bases in their territory were used to launch attacks.
Prabowo also questioned what bombing could realistically achieve. He raised concerns about whether the strategy of bombing Iran could lead to regime change, saying it is “very difficult to conduct these operations just purely from the air, ” and that it would take “indiscriminate bombing” to achieve such a goal.
Why were Gaza peacekeeping plans postponed, and what is the Board of Peace?
Prabowo said plans to deploy peacekeeping troops to Gaza under the Board of Peace have been temporarily postponed, tying the delay directly to escalating tensions in the Middle East. The postponement was presented as a practical consequence of a wider region sliding deeper into crisis.
The Board of Peace was referenced in the context of a meeting at the World Economic Forum annual meeting in Davos on Jan 22, 2026, where US President Donald Trump and Prabowo were photographed together. Beyond that reference and Prabowo’s remark that the Gaza plan is paused, details of the Board of Peace’s structure and mandate were not spelled out in the available interview excerpts.
In human terms, the pause shifts the immediate horizon for civilians waiting for relief and protection. In political terms, it signals the way one conflict can freeze the machinery designed to manage another—especially when regional actors reassess risk, timing, and feasibility.
Can Indonesia mediate, and what conditions did Prabowo set?
Prabowo reiterated an offer to mediate, but he also drew a firm boundary around what mediation can do without consent. “There must be willingness on all sides, ” he said, adding that Indonesia offers itself “as one of the mediators, ” while acknowledging that others may be “more relevant” and have “more leverage. ”
His argument for diplomacy leaned on personal experience. Prabowo recounted his past as a soldier, saying: “I was a soldier. I was in combat. And I’m the first one to realise that if we can talk, better talk. If we can resolve things on the table, better on the table. ” The statement positioned negotiation not as idealism, but as a lesson drawn from combat—an attempt to translate the cost of war into a political instinct for de-escalation.
He also relayed what he said he heard from Iranian officials: that Iran is wary of entering negotiations with the United States because it felt it had been “tricked” twice. “Twice, twice, they felt that basically they had been tricked. That’s what they said, ” Prabowo said. In diplomacy, perceptions of broken trust can become a hard constraint—one that cannot be bombed away and cannot be solved by slogans.
What is known about leadership change in Iran during the conflict?
Prabowo’s remarks unfolded against a dramatic political development described in the same conflict timeline: the military campaign killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had led the country since 1989. He was succeeded by Mojtaba Khamenei, identified as the son of the late supreme leader, who was appointed as the new head of the Islamic Republic.
Such a shift can reshape how negotiations are approached, how internal legitimacy is asserted, and how outside actors interpret signals. But Prabowo also cautioned against forecasting the war’s duration, saying he could not predict how long it would last.
What happens next for Indonesia’s stance as the crisis widens?
Prabowo’s comments sketch a posture that is neither detached nor triumphalist: a country offering mediation while admitting limits, calling for peace while watching plans for Gaza peacekeeping stall. The result is a diplomacy shaped by uncertainty—one that tries to keep the door open even when the hallway fills with smoke.
He returned repeatedly to a simple hierarchy: peaceful options first, war as the failure of imagination and trust. Yet the interview also made clear that goodwill is not the missing ingredient alone; willingness by all parties is the threshold he said must be met for mediation to matter.
For indonesia, the immediate takeaway is a balancing act between moral language and operational reality: condemning the logic of escalation, offering itself as a mediator, and postponing a Gaza peacekeeping deployment under the Board of Peace until the region’s turbulence settles—or until the next decision point forces movement again.
Image caption (alt text): indonesia President Prabowo Subianto speaking about mediation and the Middle East conflict during an interview.
