Yogyakarta. Indonesia was drawn into a geopolitical trap after joining a US-initiated peace initiative for the Middle East, only to see Washington and Israel launch strikes on Iran soon afterward, a senior academic said Tuesday.

Dafri Agussalim, professor of international relations at Gadjah Mada University (UGM), said Jakarta agreed to join the so-called Board of Peace spearheaded by US President Donald Trump on the promise of advancing a peaceful solution in Gaza and the wider region.

However, the subsequent US and Israeli military action against Iran, he argued, effectively undermined that aspiration.

“Indonesia fell into Trump and Israel’s trap through our membership in the Board of Peace. Once we joined, Israel suddenly attacked Iran. This is a hard blow to our foreign policy,” Dafri said.

Indonesia’s decision to join the board had initially drawn opposition from prominent Muslim figures, partly because Israel was also represented in the body and due to the reported $1 billion membership contribution. President Prabowo Subianto ultimately persuaded critics — including former foreign ministers — leading to Indonesia’s participation without further public protest.

Dafri warned that the timing of Indonesia’s membership, coinciding with rising tensions in the Middle East, risks creating a perception of partiality in the eyes of the international community.

Indonesia has long adhered to a “free and active” foreign policy doctrine, positioning itself as independent and non-aligned. “At the very least, we have departed from our foundational stance as a member of the Non-Aligned Movement,” he said.

Amid the ongoing Iran conflict, Prabowo has offered to mediate and expressed readiness to travel to Tehran with a peace message. But Dafri argued that Indonesia’s involvement in the Board of Peace weakens its credibility as a neutral intermediary.

“Membership in the Board makes it difficult for Indonesia to be viewed as a neutral party. That diminishes our capacity to act as a mediator,” he said.

Dafri also criticized what he described as an overly centralized foreign policy decision-making process that does not sufficiently draw on academic research and data.

Strategic policies, particularly in international affairs, should be grounded in rigorous academic study and strong data rather than intuition alone, he said.

“I have repeatedly emphasized the importance of evidence-based policy,” Dafri added.