Indonesia is approaching its centenary of independence in 2045. While\nthis may seem far off, from the perspective of nation-building, less\nthan two decades is actually a very short period.<\/p>\n
The question is not merely whether Indonesia will reach its 100th\nyear as an independent nation. A far more important question is: what\nkind of Indonesia will exist in 2045? Will we truly have become a\ndeveloped nation capable of mastering technology, building our own\nindustries, ensuring food and energy security, and standing with strong\nsovereignty? Or will we remain a large market dependent on technology,\nproducts, and various strategic needs from other nations?<\/p>\n
This question is relevant when revisiting the thoughts of national\nfigures such as Mohammad Natsir, known for his contributions to\nIndonesian sovereignty, and B.J. Haribbie, regarding the mastery of\ntechnology. Every thought is born from the context of its era. Natsir\noperated during a period when Indonesia was still struggling to form and\ndefend the state and seek foundations for national life. Habibie arrived\nin a different era: when Indonesia began to have the confidence to\ndiscuss the mastery of science, engineering, strategic industry, and\nhigh technology.<\/p>\n
Today, the context has changed again. Indonesia faces the digital\nrevolution, artificial intelligence, energy transition, electric\nvehicles, battery technology, biotechnology, advanced materials, and\ngeopolitical competition that is increasingly linked to technological\nmastery. Therefore, the question should not merely be what Natsir\nthought or what Habibie achieved, but how those spirits and ideas can be\ntranslated to address Indonesia\u2019s current challenges.<\/p>\n
We need a dialogue between the experiences of previous generations\nand the capabilities of today\u2019s Indonesian generation\u2014including\nscientists, engineers, academics, entrepreneurs, and professionals\nworking in various global research centres and industries. In this way,\nhistory becomes a source of energy for the future, rather than just a\nspace to reminisce about past glory.<\/p>\n
We possess a large population and domestic market, diverse natural\nresources, a strategic geographical position, and a wealth of culture\nthat many nations do not have. Resources only hold value if they can be\ntransformed into productivity, knowledge, technology, industry, and\nprosperity. Here, the analogy of a building becomes relevant.<\/p>\n
We often speak of downstreaming, digitalisation, industrialisation,\nenergy security, and the defence industry. All of these are important.\nHowever, a tall building cannot stand without a strong foundation. At\nleast three foundations require serious attention: education, health,\nand the ability to meet basic needs, including food.<\/p>\n
Education determines the quality of the human capital that will\nmanage the state and the economy. However, 21st-century education is not\nenough to merely produce diplomas. We need individuals capable of\ncritical thinking, conducting research, generating innovation, solving\nindustrial problems, and creating technology.<\/p>\n
Health must also be positioned as an investment in national\nproductivity. An unhealthy population cannot serve as the foundation for\na competitive economy. Furthermore, a nation of over 280 million people\nrequires a resilient food system. This is not just a matter of paddy\nfields and agricultural production, but also seed technology,\nfertilisers, water, mechanisation, energy, logistics, storage, and the\nprocessing industry. These three constitute the foundation before we can\ndiscuss a higher economic structure. These foundations appear to be\nbeing strengthened by the current government.<\/p>\n
Above these foundations, one of the most important pillars of a\ndeveloped Indonesia is industrialisation. Industrialisation should no\nlonger be understood solely as the construction of factories or the\nprocessing of raw materials into products with slightly higher added\nvalue. In the 21st century, industrialisation must mean the mastery of\ncapability\u2014meaning the Indonesian nation masters its own engineering,\nunderstands the processes, and possesses the intellectual property, so\nthat national companies can implement improvements without always\ndepending on foreign technology owners.<\/p>\n
Moreover, Indonesian engineers must possess and acquire the knowledge\nthat enables the birth of next-generation technology. A vital lesson\nfrom Indonesia\u2019s past development is that this country once served as a\nsite for the implementation of various advanced technologies in the oil\nand gas industries. Indonesia was once a significant player in energy\nproduction and exports. However, the utilisation of resources and the\ninflux of foreign technology do not automatically result in national\ntechnological mastery. The reality is that there is a vast difference\nbetween operating technology and mastering technology. A developed\nnation is not merely a technology user; it must move towards becoming a\ntechnology developer and, ultimately, a technology owner.<\/p>\n
Energy holds a special position in national development. Without\nenergy, industry stops, mobility is disrupted, food production is\nhindered, and digital infrastructure cannot function. Indonesia once\nenjoyed a period of oil and gas prosperity. That experience should\nprovide a fundamental lesson: energy resources must not be viewed merely\nas commodities for short-term revenue. Energy is also capital for\ndevelopment. One unit of energy\u2026<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/reflections-on-the-foundations-and-pillars-towards-a-developed-indonesia-1788433091", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }