The commercialization of nuclear energy (NPP) in Indonesia has stalled at the research stage, even though it meets technical, commercial, and environmental requirements. Geopolitical pressures remain a significant barrier to progress.

In response, President Prabowo Subianto—both the defense minister and now president—during his visits to international strategic partners, including Russia and the US, emphasized two key geopolitical stances and strategies for Indonesia.

First, Indonesia remains "Active Free" by cooperating across blocks amid the transnational competition for nuclear energy between the US/West and Russia/BRICS+. Second, Indonesia adheres to non-proliferation protocols and is committed to aligning its energy sovereignty vision with green energy regulations.

So, how can these political stances be translated into accelerating Indonesia and ASEAN's nuclear-powered vision while navigating its geopolitical consequences?

Caught in Green Rules

Like it or not, nuclear technology holds dual potential: energy and weapons. Historical precedents show that the transfer of nuclear energy technology often increases the risk of developing nuclear weapons.

Moreover, Indonesia is rich in vital nuclear resources, and its transformation could become even more prominent, causing neighboring countries to fear being left behind if Indonesia deviates from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) protocols.

Now, it’s clear that the nuclear diplomacy duel between the US/West and Russia/BRICS+ could lead to an arms race. Matthew Fuhrmann from Harvard may be right: nuclear energy cooperation (NPP) is a centuries-long commitment, a vital military pact to ensure the stability of its supply.

In the context of nuclear transformation, Indonesia is a prime target: the US needs new military strength to support NATO/SEATO/AUKUS expansion in ASEAN, while Russia seeks new markets to support its nuclear economic dominance in Asia. If these visions are interfered with, Indonesia may end up not only failing to achieve energy independence but also getting dragged into an arms race and becoming the epicenter of nuclear war destruction.

Faced with Russia’s nuclear economic expansion into ASEAN, the US focuses on political diplomacy through international regulators and other regional anti-nuclear pacts: the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and the Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (SEANWFZ).

While these agreements are noble, they are vulnerable to politicization by the US/West. In fact, this entanglement has stalled the realization of Russian NPP projects in Indonesia, even though Russia has been the longest and most serious investor. The US political card: portraying Russia as a regional security threat rather than an ideal nuclear energy partner.

The double standards of the IAEA, particularly in the case of the US, have damaged the credibility of the NPT, which is now being abandoned by its members. The US’s freedom to violate the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), even after failing to ratify the NPT domestically, shows that the NPT functions more as a political tool than an effective security control mechanism.

However, the US cleverly leverages these institutions: aside from security concerns—already outdated—the environmental issue is now the spearhead. The IAEA acts as a "Green Police," punishing countries that are not "aligned" and transparent about their nuclear technology progress, under the guise of disregarding environmental rules.

As a result, environmental inspections have become a political tool to surround potential civilian nuclear energy projects, or worse, to justify militaristic wars against political opponents (like the Iraq war with claims of biological weapons, and the Iran war with claims of nuclear weapons). Practically, if Indonesia does not comply, it will have no civilian nuclear reactors.

Navigating Geopolitical Pressure in ASEAN

Russia, however, wisely focuses on the region's main issues: economic and energy security. Moscow understands that the Cold War-style militaristic approach of the US is outdated.

Political influence will follow if its economic expansion in ASEAN succeeds, as demonstrated by its growing relationships with Turkey, China, India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, which have gradually embraced their ecosystem, even while maintaining close ties with the US.

Integrating Indonesia and other ASEAN members into the BRICS+ business ecosystem is a strategic first step. Regardless of military provocations, Russia is not interested.

What Should Indonesia Do?

Amid this battle of giants, Indonesia does not have to take sides. In the context of nuclear energy partnerships, the vision of national prosperity and safety should walk hand in hand. No matter the partner, Indonesia must maintain its sovereignty without allowing its energy vision to be distorted by external military-political interests that are destructive.

Transparency and consistency in national energy policies are key to mitigating the geopolitical impacts of this nuclear program.

To this end, several steps need to be taken. First, operational transparency is crucial to garnering domestic and international support. Regardless of the investor, the country must be open with the IAEA and other external audits. This accountability will mitigate public fear and prevent international geopolitical isolation.

Transparency ensures that opportunities for intrablock cooperation remain open and prevents market monopolies by specific blocs. Yes, Russia has substantial nuclear capacity and could accelerate national energy resilience and green transition, but the progress of technology transfer must still comply with non-proliferation protocols. Like it or not, NPT and IAEA are still the best efforts to prevent nuclear war.

Second, Indonesia needs vertical integration and institutionalization of nuclear energy policies to ensure the continuity of the national-business vision, supply chain stability, and program sustainability, similar to China and Russia. Streamlining and strengthening regulations are also needed to reduce politicization of this program, which often arises during each change of power cycle.

Third, nuclear technology transfer must be holistic. Investors must be involved in building the upstream-downstream industrial ecosystem—from mining to commercialization—to ensure the long-term independence of the domestic industry in building its capacity.

Cooperation should also include human resource development through scholarships, training, and integrating nuclear practitioners from investors into national universities.

As a leader in ASEAN, Indonesia has a key role in aligning the vision of prosperity with regional security. Whether partnering with the US/West or Russia/BRICS+, it does not matter as long as the national and regional vision is bridged.

If seriously committed to realizing an energy-independent future, President Prabowo Subianto must focus on maintaining a balanced foreign policy.

Political neutrality is crucial in nuclear technology transfer, but it must be accompanied by a firm commitment and a regulatory framework that supports constructive and sustainable international cooperation.

Regional Energy and Supply Chain Security

Indonesia's Nuclear Challenges: Geopolitics and Sustainability

Analysis Center for BRICS+ and ASEAN