Testriono and Yusya Alif Fitrachman – The enormous demonstrations of last week have receded. Thousands of students, app-based motorcycle taxi drivers (ojek online), and ordinary citizens are mostly back indoors, and the chaotic situation is finally under control. But although the situation is relatively calm now, the public remains unwavering in demanding meaningful political change.
Rather than addressing the grievances that underlie these protests, government officials, including President Prabowo Subianto and National Police Chief Listyo Sigit, have publicly said that the unrest was likely orchestrated or funded by foreign actors, basically framing organic social movements as inauthentic and masterminded by outsiders to undermine the country.
Despite clear and urgent domestic concerns, Prabowo has chosen to push this narrative of external manipulation. He has publicly warned against foreign agents and foreign powers who, he claims, do not want to see Indonesia rise.
He has gone further, alleging that protests are manipulated, paid for, and funded by corruptors, who seek to keep Indonesia in turmoil. Prabowo has even accused Indonesian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that promote democracy, human rights and press freedom of being funded by foreign forces seeking to divide the nation
In a striking online report, Russian media outlet Sputnik quoted an analyst who directly linked the Indonesian protests to billionaire George Soros's Open Society Foundations and the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED), mirroring Prabowo's rhetoric. These allegations were also echoed by former intelligence chief A.M. Hendropriyono, who claimed foreign involvement, again without providing evidence.
Old playbook
The narrative of labeling dissenters as foreign agents is not new. In fact, it is an old tactic revived time and again. It functions like a political ghost: invisible and unprovable but effective in silencing opposition and consolidating state control.
Vedi Hadiz has said that Prabowo is merely continuing a long tradition that began under the New Order. He explains that President Soeharto, who pursued foreign investment for his developmentalist policies, consistently stated that criticism of the government was the result of manipulation by foreign powers to weaken Indonesia through domestic agents.
And answering questions from journalists from seven media outlets several months ago, President Prabowo had claimed that foreign powers were behind mass rallies in March that protesting amendments to the Indonesian Military Law.
Of course, the foreign agent narrative is not unique to Indonesia; it is a well-worn playbook used by many governments to shift accountability, suppress criticism, and justify a more oppressive approach toward its own citizens These narrative warfare strategies are commonly used by authoritarian regimes to justify greater repression and stricter social control. By labeling demonstrators as tools of external forces, governments can rationalise security force actions. This rhetoric typically exploits nationalist sentiment, portraying the government as the guardian of sovereignty against foreign meddling
Delegitimising civil society movement
Blaming foreign actors without clear, verifiable proof takes the focus off policy failures and weakens democratic accountability. It shifts focus away from rooted systemic problems and makes civil society movements seem less legitimate by framing protests as manipulated instead of authentic manifestations of public anger. It is an act of denial that discredits the legitimacy of the civil society movements.
The use of foreign agent narratives can be very effective. Certainly, the recent protests in Indonesia seemed to fade quickly once the foreign agent label had sowed doubt among the public, and the police detained approximately 3,000 protesters, including students.
Among those arrested were activist Delpedro Marhaen, the executive director of the Lokataru Foundation, on 1 September, who faces charges of inciting the public to take part in anarchist actions. He was detained alongside a student activist of Riau University, Khariq Anhar, and Syahdan Husein, a Gejayan Memanggil member of Yogyakarta. Most recently, army representatives met with police to discuss the possible arrest of Ferry Irwandi, CEO of the Malaka Project, for statements he made criticising the government and lawmakers.
What should progressive civil society forces do?
To counter the government's foreign agent narrative, civil society organisations (CSOs) need to respond in a strategic manner. First, they should make transparency a top priority by making public the sources of their funding and allowing their activities to be checked by independent groups. This will preempt allegations of foreign influence. For example, CSO involved in past demonstrations, such as the 2019 protests, should publish verified donation reports.
Second, civil society organisations should promote public skepticism and resilience by launching public campaigns through channels including social media to disprove the foreign agent rhetoric and combat disinformation. This can help activists regain their legitimacy and strengthen their position within society.
Finally, CSOs can build broad-based alliances and cross sector collaboration with other CSOs to pursue legal advocacy against wrongful arrests or excessive use of force. This may involve providing legal aid to detainees, challenging charges in court, or filing judicial review petitions if laws are used in ways that suppress freedom of expression or assembly. Legal advocacy also extends to documenting patterns of abuse, collecting testimonies, and using these to demand reform of policing.
Democracy thrives on a strong and vibrant civil society. However, repressive regimes will attempt to undermine CSOs through cooptation, discursive manipulation, and delegitimising frames such as the foreign agent narrative. To safeguard democracy, disinformation must be confronted, and the old playbook used by ruling political elites must be torn up.