Indonesia Promotes Board of Peace as Diplomatic Channel for Full Palestinian Recognition
Indonesia has once again positioned multilateral diplomacy as a strategic avenue to advance full Palestinian recognition at international forums. Indonesia’s historical experience of leveraging global mechanisms to secure sovereignty recognition serves as an important reference point, including the current emergence of the Board of Peace (BoP) as a new diplomatic channel.
Khairul Fahmi, co-founder of the Institute for Security and Strategic Studies (ISESS), stated that Indonesian independence was achieved not only through armed struggle but also through an extended process of international diplomacy.
He assessed that Indonesian sovereignty recognition was secured after a process of global negotiations, including the establishment of the Committee of Good Offices on Indonesia by the UN Security Council in 1947.
“During the most critical phase of the revolution, when Dutch military aggression sought to destroy the republic’s existence, the international community intervened through the establishment of the Committee of Good Offices on Indonesia by the United Nations Security Council in 1947,” Fahmi stated in his remarks, cited on Sunday, 1 March 2026.
According to Fahmi, the Committee of Good Offices created legal space for Indonesia to be recognised as a legitimate party to the conflict, even though the committee’s composition was not entirely favourable to the Republic.
Belgium was deemed close to the Netherlands, whilst the United States still weighed European interests, and Australia emerged as the relatively more sympathetic party.
“Indonesia certainly did not win every detail of the negotiations. The Renville Agreement was even experienced as bitter. However, the Republic succeeded in maintaining its existence until the geopolitical momentum shifted,” he said.
He assessed that this experience remains relevant to the dynamics of the Board of Peace, which possesses legitimacy through UN Security Council resolution. According to him, multilateral forums do not automatically side with the weaker party, but can serve as a bridge towards the establishment of a sovereign state if they possess a clear mandate and collective oversight.
The Israeli–Palestinian conflict, he continued, is far more complex as it involves issues of statehood, regional security, and internal political fragmentation.
In an increasingly polarised world, the Board of Peace will be tested not only as a mediator but also as a guardian of the political transition towards Palestinian statehood recognition.
“If the Board of Peace is able to carry out its mandate consistently and credibly, that mechanism could be recorded as an instrument that helps open the way for the birth of an independent Palestinian state,” Fahmi said.