Indonesia’s Trade Deal with America: an exercise in Timing, or How to Sign a Treaty One Day Before the Rug is Pulled

The Kabinet Merah Putih has always presented itself as the kind of government that knows a good deal when it sees one—provided, of course, the deal is actually good. So naturally, last week they signed a sweeping trade agreement with the United States. The very next day, the American Supreme Court declared the tariffs that shaped the entire deal illegal. The timing, as they say, was impeccable.^{[1] [2] [3]}

The deal itself is simple: American products get into Indonesia with fewer import taxes. The quid pro quo? Indonesia rewrites its labor laws, overhauls its regulations, and—buried in the fine print—hands American companies expanded access to its mineral resources. In fairness, this does align with Indonesia’s long-standing bebas dan aktif foreign policy—if by “free and active” you mean “bending over backward for whoever’s offering.”^{[4] [5]}

But the real fun is in the sequence. The ink wasn’t even dry before the US Supreme Court ruled the tariffs underpinning the deal unlawful. Undeterred, the former president responded by slapping 10% tariffs on the entire world, citing a legal provision that, in theory, lasts 150 days. Extending it would require Congress, and Congress, as we know, is about as enthusiastic about protectionism as a cat in a bathtub.^{[6] [7]}

Now the analysts are divided. Celios, a think tank, says Indonesia can just walk away—the EU already froze its own US trade deal after the ruling. International law professor Marco Marketti warns that backing out risks embarrassment and a dent in Indonesia’s reputation as a reliable partner. In my opinion, that ship may have already sailed.^{[8] [9]}

Meanwhile, the government has announced it will continue to process the agreement. The word process is doing a lot of work here. It could mean careful review. It could mean crossing fingers and hoping the problem disappears. What it does not mean is a sudden surge of national pride. The prevailing mood is confusion: why give up minerals and regulatory control only for the other side to change the rules before the appetizers arrive?^[10]

Here’s a country that has spent decades selling itself as the master of strategic autonomy. Now the most patriotic move on the table is continuing to process an agreement that may no longer make sense. The government’s approach? Bureaucratic inertia: if you can’t decide whether to run toward the fire or away from it, at least keep the paperwork moving. The US is no stranger to sudden pivots, so if Indonesia is the one left holding the bag, it’s in familiar company. Whether the bag contains a gift or a time bomb, apparently, we’ll find out by continuing to process. Make of that what you will.

---