Homepage Widgets

Homepage Widgets (ATF)

Indonesia denies Israel normalization over Board of Peace

Jakarta says joining U.S.-initiated Board of Peace with Israel does not signal diplomatic normalization.

Indonesia said on Thursday that its participation in the U.S.-initiated Board of Peace alongside Israel does not amount to normalization of diplomatic relations, reaffirming its long-standing support for Palestinian statehood.

Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto signs the Board of Peace Charter in Davos, Switzerland, January 22, 2026.

JAKARTA — The Board of Peace, established on Jan. 15, 2026, was initiated by U.S. President Donald Trump to oversee implementation of the Gaza Peace Plan and United Nations Security Council Resolution 2803, with a mandate covering ceasefire monitoring, civilian protection and post-conflict reconstruction.

“Indonesia’s presence in the Board of Peace should not be interpreted as normalization of political relations with any party, or as legitimacy towards any country’s policies,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Yvonne Mewengkang said in a video statement.

Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim-majority nation, does not have formal diplomatic ties with Israel and has repeatedly said normalization would be contingent upon the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced Israel’s accession to the body on Wednesday on social media platform X, posting a photograph of a signing ceremony in Washington alongside U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Mewengkang said Jakarta joined the initiative strictly to help stabilize Gaza, protect civilians and support reconstruction efforts in line with Resolution 2803.

“The membership of any country in the Board of Peace does not change that principled position,” she said, adding that Indonesia would use its participation to encourage involvement of the Palestinian Authority and advocate for a two-state solution.

The formation of the Board has drawn mixed reactions internationally, with some governments welcoming a new multilateral oversight mechanism while others have questioned its structure, funding and political alignment.