Despite claiming firm solidarity with Palestine, Indonesia has again awarded a major energy concession to a company deeply embedded in Israel’s economic system. The signal is unmistakable. Commercial gain outweighs political conviction.

On January 8, 2026, the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources issued Decree No. 8.K/EK.04/MEM.E/2026. The decree named PT Ormat Geothermal Indonesia as the winner of the Telaga Ranu geothermal working area tender in West Halmahera, North Maluku. The announcement became public four days later. The project marks an early step in expanding geothermal capacity in eastern Indonesia.

The concession allows the company to move from exploration to development under current geothermal rules. Officials describe the project as part of the national shift toward renewable energy and the Net Zero Emission 2060 target. Telaga Ranu holds strong geothermal potential but lacks infrastructure. The state wants investors who can act quickly and carry risk. From a narrow planning perspective, the choice appears practical.

The central question is the identity of the partner.

PT Ormat Geothermal Indonesia is a subsidiary of Ormat Technologies Inc., a global renewable energy firm with deep operational roots in Israel. Israeli engineers founded the company. It maintains major manufacturing facilities there. Its shares trade on the New York and Tel Aviv stock exchanges. Its technology and corporate trajectory remain closely tied to Israel’s energy sector.

This connection is structural, not symbolic. Capital moves through Israeli markets. Engineering expertise developed there supports the company’s geothermal systems. When governments sign contracts with firms shaped by that ecosystem, they enter economic relationships that cross political boundaries.

Ormat has operated in Indonesia for years. It holds stakes in projects such as the Ijen geothermal facility in East Java and supplies equipment and expertise for fields including Salak. The Telaga Ranu concession deepens that presence. The company is widely viewed by critics as part of Israel’s broader public diplomacy architecture, often referred to as Hasbara, which uses strategic sectors such as energy to expand acceptance and normalize international partnerships. Regardless of formal designation, the association heightens concern that Indonesia’s cooperation carries political weight beyond a standard commercial contract.

Indonesia cannot claim moral leadership on Palestine while expanding business with Israel-linked corporations. The contradiction is clear. Foreign policy loses force when economic policy points in the opposite direction.

Supporters may argue that energy development should stand apart from geopolitics. That view overlooks how states use trade to express political values. Countries have restricted imports, recalibrated defense ties, and applied economic pressure to signal diplomatic positions. Energy contracts warrant the same level of scrutiny.

Concerns extend beyond geopolitics. Critics say the tender advanced too quickly and lacked meaningful public consultation. Telaga Ranu connects to local ecosystems, water sources, and community land. Large geothermal projects can disrupt these systems when oversight falters. Exploration drilling can shift groundwater patterns. Infrastructure can divide forests. Economic gains often arrive slower than promised.

Geothermal energy produces fewer emissions than coal, yet it carries environmental and social risks. Projects across Indonesia have faced protests over land use, ecological impact, and uneven profit sharing. Some groups have urged the president to review the minister’s policy and suspend exploration.

The deeper issue is consistency. If Indonesia seeks to stand firmly with Palestine, it must reconsider partnerships with Israel-linked firms. Governments often claim that businesses operate apart from moral commitments. Contracts tell a different story. This concession indicates that investment still ranks above stated solidarity.

Indonesia faces a clear choice. It can treat the Palestinian cause as diplomatic language while pursuing any available investor. Or it can align economic decisions with the values it promotes abroad. Credibility depends on that alignment. Without it, pro-Palestinian rhetoric risks sounding less like principle and more like branding.

----

The opinion article is written by Dr. Muhammad Zulfikar Rakhmat, CELIOS director for Indonesia–MENA, and Wishnu Try Utomo, CELIOS director of mining advocacy.

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors.