Why Prabowo's Plan to Mediate Iran–US–Israel Has Drawn a Flood of Criticism
Binus University International Relations lecturer Tia Mariatul Kibtiah explained the reasons why Indonesia’s plan to reconcile Iran with the United States and Israel has drawn criticism from several quarters. According to Tia, the main reason is that the administration of President Prabowo Subianto does not realise Indonesia’s weak position to act as a peace broker for a country at war. The public, she said, doubts Indonesia’s ability because Iran does not agree with Prabowo’s stance as a member of the Peace Board established by United States President Donald Trump. She argued that Trump’s dominance in directing the Board of Peace would be the main obstacle to any third-party mediation effort.
During an online discussion organised by the Institute for Strategic Transformation Forstra on Saturday, 7 March 2026, Tia asked: ‘Could Indonesia manage to arrange, or whisper to Trump to stop this conflict? Why is the international public laughing, and domestic audiences bullying as well? The problem lies there.’
She also reminded that the Iranian Ambassador to Indonesia, Mohammad Boroujerdi, had firmly rejected the mediation plan with the United States. Although Indonesia has good diplomatic relations with both Iran and the United States, she stressed that the existence of the BoP would be a weak point because the organisation concentrates power on Trump.
Tia noted that Iran is disappointed with Indonesia after joining the Peace Board, which is seen as undermining the principle of an independent and active foreign policy. She said that stance could be seen as conflicting with the commitment to support Palestinian self-determination from Israeli occupation.
‘Perhaps the President sees this as a way to defend Palestine, but on the other hand it could wound several countries that stand with Palestine,’ she added.
Tia also stressed that Indonesia needs to understand what diplomacy means. To be a diplomat, she argued, Indonesia must win the trust of both Iran and the United States. However, she contended that Iran no longer trusts Indonesia, particularly given the BoP seen as signaling a tilt towards the United States.
Without credibility to be a bargaining power, how will Indonesia persuade or calm Iran and the United States? ‘We have good bilateral relations with both Iran and the United States, but do the two of them have the capacity to listen?’ she asked.
The Iranian Ambassador to Indonesia, Mohammad Boroujerdi, appreciated Prabowo’s intention to travel to Tehran to lower the escalation of the Iran–US–Israel conflict. But Boroujerdi stressed that he refused to negotiate with the Trump administration, saying, ‘We believe that there is currently no negotiation or talks with the American government that will be useful, because they are not bound to any outcome.’ He spoke from his residence in Menteng, Central Jakarta, on Monday, 2 March 2026.
Former Deputy Foreign Minister Dino Patti Djalal judged Prabowo’s idea unrealistic. His readiness comments came hours after the Foreign Ministry said that Israel, together with the United States, again attacked Tehran on 28 February 2026. He listed at least four reasons: first, the United States rarely agrees to be mediated by a third party when launching military strikes. Dino believed President Trump does not want Indonesia to get involved, arguing that Trump is currently hell-bent on toppsing the Iranian government.
Second, Iran’s government has not recently been close to Indonesia’s government. He noted that in the last 15 months President Prabowo has not visited Iran nor met President Masoud Pezeshkian.
Third, even if Prabowo is prepared to fly to Tehran as mediator, it is unlikely that President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio—as the parties attacking Iran—would be willing to visit Tehran.
Finally, the mediation effort would require Prabowo to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the principal actor in launching the attack on Iran. Dino stressed that this would not be possible politically, diplomatically, or logistically.