E-International Relations is free to read. We rely on reader support to make this possible.

On 7 November 2025, Jakarta was shaken by a series of explosions. Anti-terror police located seven explosives, of which four were said to have detonated, leading to the injury of 96 people at a mosque in the SMAN 72 state high school located in the city’s north. The alleged attacker has been reported as a 17-year-old student who, in an unusual turn, ostensibly idolised past acts of white nationalist terrorism. The individual in question was allegedly found in possession of a toy gun littered with inscriptions that make reference to white supremacist terminology and past extreme right-wing attackers. Indeed, strewn across the toy are express references to the perpetrator of the 2019 Christchurch massacre, alongside far-right terrorist Luca Traini, and the culprit behind the 2017 Quebec City mosque shooting, Alexandre Bissonnette.

In the aftermath, it has been widely reported in local media that Indonesian policymakers are contemplating the imposition of greater regulation over online video games, with this interpreted variously as implying some form of restriction, or even a ban, on particular games. After receiving updates on the investigation from National Police Chief General Listyo Sigit Prabowo, President Prabowo Subianto requested that his cabinet explore options on how to tackle the supposed negative impacts that online games have on youth. PUBG (previously PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds), an immensely popular game developed by South Korea’s Krafton Inc., has been singled out by minister of the state secretariat Prasetyo Hadi. Beyond PUBG, however, there remains no information about what other games may be considered for restrictions. In what shape this regulatory move will materialise, if at all, remains unclear. In any case, this simmering moral panic is, as I argue below, misplaced. It is grounded in a faulty logic and misdirects attention from the real drivers of radicalisation.

While information on the proposed move remains patchy, a number of policymakers have expressed support. Amelia Anggraini, Member of the Indonesian House of Representatives, has suggested that any such restrictions should not serve as a mere slogan, but be coupled with actual controls established through stakeholder engagement and, in a more fruitful addition, supplemented by digital literacy programmes. The proposed restriction of PUBG has likewise been welcomed by Margaret Aliyatul Maimunah, chairperson of the Indonesian Child Protection Commission (Komisi Perlindungan Anak Indonesia, KPAI). KPAI Commissioner Aris Adi Leksono has similarly indicated that such a move, while insufficient alone, is a positive step. For him, “[t]he impact [of online content for youth] has become increasingly evident. It’s not just what happened at SMAN 72 in Jakarta. There have been several incidents where exposure to what they watched in their games and on social media has had an impact”. Minister of the state secretariat Hadi has also endorsed the call, suggesting that it may be necessary because such games could negatively influence future generations of youth. With reference to PUBG, Hadi continued on to add that “[p]layers can easily learn the types of weapons. And they will start to normalize violence”.

It should be added that this is not the first occasion in which Indonesian authorities have contemplated banning a battle royale-style game like PUBG on similar grounds. In mid-2024, reports circulated that........

© E-International