In a significant escalation of domestic concern, the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), alongside prominent academics and diplomats, has publicly urged the government to reconsider its involvement in the board, especially after the US and Israel, both are members of the BoP, started the war against Iran on Feb. 28.

The pressure became so palpable that on the night of March 5, President Prabowo Subianto convened a high-level gathering at the Merdeka Palace, inviting former presidents, vice presidents and over 160 Islamic scholars to evaluate the nation’s strategic posture.

During the briefing, the President offered a pragmatic defense, arguing that after decades of advocating for Palestine from the outside, Indonesia must now attempt to influence the process from the inside. Yet, in a nod to the growing public outcry, Prabowo issued a crucial caveat, vowing that Indonesia will withdraw from the board if it fails to deliver tangible progress toward an independent Palestinian state or if it begins to undermine Indonesia’s national interests.

The more fundamental question is, however, whether involvement in the board remains consistent with Indonesia’s long-standing foreign policy doctrine: of a bebas aktif (independent and active) foreign policy. The Preamble of the 1945 Constitution tasks the Republic with participating in the establishment of a world order based on independence, lasting peace and social justice.

In 1948, founding father Mohammad Hatta asserted that bebas aktif did not mean passive neutrality. Indonesia must remain free to determine its own position without binding itself to any great power bloc. During the Cold War, the principle led Indonesia to refuse military alliances, choosing instead to be a bridge for dialogue.

The key question today is whether participation in the Board of Peace, an ad hoc forum initiated by a specific political leader rather than a formal multilateral body like the United Nations, still falls within that tradition.