Danantara: Bhap or Zhap?

In modern social circles, whenever a new breakthrough or entity emerges, there is usually only one essential question. Borrowing a term popularised by the ‘Grind Boys’; is it ‘bhap’ or ‘zhap’? Is it truly cool and impactful, or is it merely hype and discourse that ultimately leads to nothing?

This contemporary question is highly relevant when observing the emergence of Danantara. Since this institution was established to steer transformation, has the performance of our State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) truly surged (zhap), or is it merely treading water (bhap)?

To answer this, we must dissect the underlying context. Change is an inevitability in the business world. In today’s highly dynamic environment, change is not merely a cycle, but has become the new normal.

The father of modern management, Peter Drucker, once sharply stated, “Innovation is the specific instrument of entrepreneurs. The means by which they mould change into opportunity.” A changing environment does not always have to be viewed as a threat. Conversely, as Drucker noted, change always contains opportunities to innovate and pave the way for new prospects.

However, if we look at Indonesia’s history, there is a sort of anomaly regarding change in the economic sector. If we revisit literature from the 1980s, such as Richard Robison’s magnum opus, Indonesia: The Rise of Capital, we find a bitter reality: our system of managing national wealth and the economy appeared to be stagnating. According to Robison, our economic culture at that time remained identical to the VOC era—extractive, elitist, and monopolistic.

Robison’s view serves as a fitting mirror to examine the condition of our SOEs prior to the era of transformation. Many institutions that should have been the engines of the people’s economy were instead trapped in inefficiency, operating with a colonial legacy mentality that only benefited a few.

In their book Why Nations Fail, Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson clearly narrated the historical path of nations. They assert that advanced and prosperous nations are those capable of managing their economies inclusively. They are not nations that rely solely on natural resource exploitation, but those that build human resource quality to foster a healthy, equal, and innovative competitive climate.

Upon being inaugurated as President, Prabowo stated his commitment to ending the extractive and monopolistic culture in the Indonesian economy. Through his economic philosophy, known as ‘Prabowonomics’, Prabowo offers a new idea through an instrument called Danantara.

Danantara arrives with the exact spirit of opposing extractive and monopolistic economic practices. Its existence is not intended to monopolise assets, but rather to serve as an instrument to break down the economic barriers that have long been monopolised.

Philosophically, Danantara is a true fruit of ‘Prabowonomics’—an idea based on the effort to create inclusivity through economic equality. The basis for Indonesia’s inclusive economy is explicitly mandated in Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution.

Prabowo is well aware that Danantara was not formed with the intent to strengthen the state’s monopoly grip. The primary goal is to dismantle the extractive economic structure that has gradually eroded the nation’s potential since the VOC era. Of course, changing a culture rooted for hundreds of years cannot be done overnight. It requires strong affirmative action through Danantara, using a purely business-oriented, professional, and rational approach.

However, every change requires a process. So does Danantara. As a holding company overseeing all SOEs and the Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF) managing national wealth, Danantara needs time to consolidate its strength, reform outdated practices, and dismantle old cultures. Now, under more directed command, the achievements and transformation of SOEs are beginning to show undeniable results.

So, returning to the initial question: bhap or zhap? The following figures serve as validation that SOE performance is surging sharply.

This performance improvement is directly reflected in the surge of SOE dividends, which are projected to hit IDR 131.4 trillion in 2025, a significant increase from the IDR 85.6 trillion achieved in 2024. In terms of profitability as of April 2026, the banking sector, as the main contributor, has recorded excellent results. For instance, Bank Mandiri booked a profit of IDR 21.3 trillion (up 13%), and BRI recorded a profit of IDR 21.2 trillion (up 15%).

This momentum is not limited to the financial sector. In the energy sector, Pertamina recorded a record profit of IDR 24.9 trillion, an 80% jump compared to April 2025. This was achieved through consolidation in Pertamina’s upstream sectors, namely Patra Niaga, Pertamina International Shipping, and Kilang.

The most phenomenal growth was shown by Pupuk Indonesia (PIHC), which booked a profit of IDR 4.8 trillion, skyrocketing by 202 percent.

Furthermore, the success of this transformation has been able to revive entities that were previously struggling. Krakatau Steel, which was once burdened by heavy debt, successfully reduced its debt from US$1.7 billion to US$1.1 billion, drastically lowered interest burdens, and in April 2025, managed to record a profit of IDR 635 billion.

This success was achieved through four measurable stages of transformation: Fundamental Business Review, Business Consolidation, Transformation Journey, and Value Creation.

In PIHC, for example, the subsidy scheme was changed from ‘cost-plus’ to ‘mark-to-market’, providing the agility to reap profits while managing global commodity fluctuations. In the Industrial Estate division, the new management set a record by providing 142 hectares of land in 2025. As a result, revenue surged to IDR 3.81 trillion and profits reached IDR 1.3 trillion. This transformation has been successful.