The study, published in Formosa Journal of Multidisciplinary Research in 2026, was written by Muhammad Novrianto, Yanda Dwira Firman Z, and Edy Saptono from the Universitas Pertahanan Republik Indonesia. It highlights how modern threats now operate in what experts call the “gray zone” — a space between peace and war where attacks occur without weapons or formal declarations.
The authors argue that Indonesia’s vulnerability lies not in a lack of weapons or personnel, but in slow bureaucracy, fragmented authority, and outdated defense governance.
Digital Threats Are Replacing Traditional Warfare
The research emphasizes that today’s security challenges no longer come in the form of military invasions. Instead, countries are increasingly targeted through cyberattacks, economic pressure, data breaches, and disinformation campaigns.
Indonesia has already experienced these risks firsthand. In 2024, a ransomware attack on the National Data Center disrupted immigration services, public administration, and digital government systems for weeks. According to the authors, this incident exposed a deeper problem: Indonesia’s defense framework is not designed to respond to non-military crises.
“Modern conflicts are no longer fought with tanks and soldiers alone,” the researchers explain. “They are conducted through networks, data systems, and economic leverage.”
A Defense System Stuck in the Past
The study points out that Indonesia’s defense doctrine still focuses heavily on territorial protection and conventional military threats. This approach is rooted in the Sistem Pertahanan Semesta (Total People’s Defense), which historically emphasized physical resistance and military mobilization.
However, the researchers argue that this model no longer matches today’s reality.
While cyberattacks and economic coercion operate at digital speed, government responses remain slow and fragmented. Coordination between ministries often requires multiple layers of approval, making rapid response nearly impossible.
The researchers describe this condition as “administrative lag” — a situation where government procedures move far slower than modern threats.
Fragmented Authority Weakens National Security
One of the most critical findings in the study is the absence of a unified command structure to handle non-military threats.
Currently:
- Cyber issues fall under one agency
- Economic security is handled by another
- Intelligence operates separately
- Military involvement is limited unless a formal threat is declared
This fragmented system causes delays and confusion during crises. The study notes that Indonesia lacks a fully operational National Security Council with real authority to coordinate responses across civilian and military institutions.
“Each agency works within its own silo,” the authors explain, “but modern threats are cross-sectoral and coordinated.”
The Misinterpretation of National Defense
The research also criticizes how Indonesia interprets the concept of “total defense.” While the doctrine emphasizes public participation, in practice it often translates into military-style training rather than digital resilience.
According to the authors, modern national defense should focus on:
- Cyber awareness
- Digital infrastructure protection
- Economic resilience
- Public literacy against misinformation
“National resilience today is built on data security and institutional coordination, not just physical readiness,” the study states.
Key Findings at a Glance
The research identifies three core weaknesses in Indonesia’s defense management:
- Doctrinal mismatch: Defense policies remain focused on physical warfare rather than digital threats
- Institutional fragmentation: No single authority manages non-military crises
- Slow response mechanisms: Bureaucratic procedures delay urgent action
These issues, the authors warn, leave Indonesia vulnerable to strategic pressure without ever facing open conflict.
Why This Research Matters
The findings arrive at a critical moment, as cyber warfare, economic coercion, and information manipulation increasingly shape global politics. Countries that fail to adapt their governance structures risk losing sovereignty without firing a single shot.
The study stresses that Indonesia’s challenge is not technological capacity, but governance design.
“If the system remains unchanged, the country will continue reacting rather than anticipating,” the authors note.
Policy Implications and Recommendations
To address these vulnerabilities, the researchers propose several reforms:
0 Komentar