UI Observer: Indonesia's Mediation in Israel-US-Iran Conflict Deemed Irrational
Indonesia’s plan to assume a mediation role in the triangle conflict between Israel, the United States (US), and Iran has faced sharp criticism. Suzie Sudarman, an international relations observer at the University of Indonesia (UI), has assessed that such a step is neither realistic nor advisable, and could potentially undermine Indonesia’s negotiating position on the world stage.
This criticism responds to President Prabowo Subianto’s stated willingness to travel to Tehran to mediate tensions, provided all parties grant their consent. However, according to Suzie, the clash of global interests at present is too complex to be penetrated by Indonesian diplomacy.
Suzie explained that the current situation is highly unfavourable for mediation efforts. Israel, in her view, is racing against time amid a shift in American public opinion, which is becoming increasingly critical of Zionism.
“It is highly irrational because Israel is rushing against time whilst the American public has become more open-minded about the dangers of Zionism to their own nation,” Suzie said when contacted by Media Indonesia on Tuesday (3 March 2026).
The effectiveness of mediation is also questioned due to the imbalance of influence in Washington. Suzie highlighted how one party feels exceptionally advantaged by current American foreign policy, which tends to be readily influenced to offer unconditional support.
She even alluded to dynamics in American domestic politics, including sensitive issues such as the Epstein file, which she believes could affect the position of political figures such as Donald Trump. In her view, Israel will not wait for a mediation process because it is focused on ambitions of long-term superiority to realise “Greater Israel”.
In her analysis, Suzie divided global power structures into three hierarchical layers. She placed Indonesia in the third category, meaning it has limited room to manoeuvre in determining the direction of global politics, which is dominated by superpowers.
“If Indonesia is merely positioned in the third category, all it can do is become an instrument to evict Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank,” she asserted.
If Indonesia persists in forcing a mediator role without commensurate power capacity, Suzie warned of the risk of diminishing national dignity. She likened this step to “a foolish attempt to grasp the moon”.
She also highlighted the factor of racial perception in global politics, which often causes initiatives from developing nations to be viewed with disdain by major powers, which she believes are currently influenced by specific agendas in the Middle East.
“It is absurd for a weak nation to pretend to be one capable of interacting as an equal. Indonesia should not expose its president to the humiliation of the nation by openly fantasising about being a superior nation,” Suzie continued.
Rather than pursuing international legitimacy through mediation deemed irrational, Suzie advised the government to focus on national stability and the welfare of the people. She emphasised the importance of international trade logic in maintaining peace.
Suzie concluded by urging the national leadership to remain grounded in the principle of prudence and not become trapped in erratic or inconsistent policies amid global uncertainty. She also touched on Indonesia’s role in building ASEAN as an effort to maintain regional stability.