ASEAN Beat | Diplomacy | Southeast Asia

What the Deaths of Indonesia’s Peacekeepers Mean for Its Foreign Policy

The deaths and injuries serve as a stark reminder of the risks of Jakarta becoming more closely involved in a volatile region.

UNIFIL forces patrol along the Blue Line, a temporary demarcation line separating Lebanon from Israel and the Golan Heights.

The deaths of three Indonesian peacekeepers within 24 hours in southern Lebanon mark a grim moment for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and Indonesia’s peacekeeping history. The incidents, which initially left five other peacekeepers injured, were followed four days later by a third incident that wounded three more Indonesian soldiers, highlighting a pattern of escalating risk. These events took place amid escalating conflicts between Hezbollah and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) amid the latter’s invasion of southern Lebanon. Both the U.N. and the Indonesian government have strongly condemned the attacks and called for a thorough investigation, although it remains unclear who was responsible.

Beyond the tragic loss of life, there are at least four reasons why these incidents are significant. First, the circumstances of the attacks raise serious concerns about intent and targeting. The casualties occurred in three separate incidents. The first incident took place on March 30, when a projectile struck U.N. Post 7-1 near Adchit Al Qusayr. This post has served as the headquarters of Indonesia’s mechanized battalion since 2009. In this view, the post is not an obscure or temporary site; its location and role should be well known to both the IDF, Hezbollah, and other armed actors operating in southern Lebanon.

The second incident involved an explosion of “unknown origin” that hit a UNIFIL logistics convoy near Bani Hayyan on March 31. As with the attack on U.N. Post 7-1, this second fatal incident stands out because UNIFIL convoys, with their clearly marked white-painted vehicles, operate there on a routine basis.

The third incident happened on April 3 when a blast of unknown origin injured three Indonesian peacekeepers inside U.N. Post 9-63 near El Adeisse, which sits close to the U.N.-demarcated line separating Lebanon and Israel called the “Blue Line”. Similar to the first incident, this was not a random or temporary location. As an established UNIFIL position, its location and coordinates should be well-known.

Taken together, there is a big question about whether the Indonesian contingent may have been deliberately targeted, rather than simply caught in the crossfire. This speculation is not entirely new.

In October 2024, two Indonesian peacekeepers were injured after an Israeli tank fired at an observation tower at UNIFIL headquarters in Naqoura, an incident that also drew strong international condemnation. In the same year, Israel demanded that the U.N. pull its peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon. Additionally, on the same day that U.N. Post-71 was attacked, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the expansion of the Israeli military operation in southern Lebanon.

Meanwhile, U.N. reporting noted several occasions in which projectiles believed to have been fired by Hezbollah or affiliated groups struck UNIFIL positions, including the October 29, 2024, incident that injured four Austrian peacekeepers.

The second reason these events are significant is that for years, Indonesia has been UNIFIL’s largest troop contributor. The country is currently deploying around 755 personnel or 10 percent of the mission’s total manpower. Moreover, since 2009, Indonesia has continuously deployed a naval vessel to support the mission’s Maritime Task Force, a practice that continued until last year and further demonstrates its long-standing commitment to the mission. This makes UNIFIL Indonesia’s flagship peacekeeping mission, both operationally and symbolically. Some Indonesian legislators are now calling on the government to evaluate or even consider withdrawing Indonesian troops from Lebanon. However, as some observers recently argued, doing so might have wider consequences, including weakening the UNIFIL at a critical moment and undermining Indonesia’s hard-earned credibility in global peacekeeping.

Third, the deaths of Indonesian peacekeepers could have wider policy consequences by reinforcing Indonesia’s growing hesitation over its already highly controversial involvement in the U.S. President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace, of which Israel is also a member. Even before these incidents, Jakarta had already begun to distance itself from the Board following the U.S. and Israel strikes on Iran. For example, it has paused discussions on the initiative and postponed plans to send troops to Gaza as part of the board’s proposed International Stabilization Force.

If the deaths lead Indonesia to further distance itself from the Board, it could slow President Prabowo Subianto’s push for a more proactive foreign policy. Involvement in the Board has been central to his efforts to project Indonesia as a more influential global player, but the risks highlighted in Lebanon may force a more cautious approach. Ideally, this should serve as a reminder for Jakarta to ensure that any new commitments that it undertakes in the future – especially those involved in high-risk missions like the proposed International Stabilization Force – are both politically and operationally sustainable.

Furthermore, the deaths and injuries serve as a stark reminder of the real casualty risks involved when one deploys its force, even for a long-standing U.N.-mandated peacekeeping mission, in a volatile and fast-escalating region. Coupled with growing domestic condemnation – much of it directed at Israeli military operations in Lebanon – the incidents are likely to deepen Jakarta’s doubts about sending another peacekeeping force to the region.

Finally, there is also a practical question of whether such deployments are still feasible. If Jakarta chooses to proceed with sending troops to Gaza, it must invest in much stronger force protection, such as mine-resistant vehicles, hardened shelters, and improved base defense systems. While this would inevitably increase the logistical burden and financial cost of the mission, it is necessary to help prevent, or at least reduce, the likelihood of a similar tragedy experienced by its UNIFIL personnel, especially as ceasefire violations, including airstrikes and shelling, continued across the Gaza Strip.

In the end, the loss of Indonesian peacekeepers in Lebanon is more than a tragic loss. It puts Indonesia’s international role, credibility, and judgment under closer scrutiny, both at home and abroad. As Jakarta considers its next steps – whether in Lebanon or elsewhere in the Middle East – it must balance ambition with caution, and commitment with protection, for those decisions will determine how many Indonesian men and women in uniform will be asked to risk – and possibly lose – their lives.

Get to the bottom of the story

Subscribe today and join thousands of diplomats, analysts, policy professionals and business readers who rely on The Diplomat for expert Asia-Pacific coverage.

Get unlimited access to in-depth analysis you won't find anywhere else, from South China Sea tensions to ASEAN diplomacy to India-Pakistan relations. More than 5,000 articles a year.

Unlimited articles and expert analysis

Weekly newsletter with exclusive insights

16-year archive of diplomatic coverage

Ad-free reading on all devices

Support independent journalism

Already have an account? Log in.

The deaths of three Indonesian peacekeepers within 24 hours in southern Lebanon mark a grim moment for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and Indonesia’s peacekeeping history. The incidents, which initially left five other peacekeepers injured, were followed four days later by a third incident that wounded three more Indonesian soldiers, highlighting a pattern of escalating risk. These events took place amid escalating conflicts between Hezbollah and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) amid the latter’s invasion of southern Lebanon. Both the U.N. and the Indonesian government have strongly condemned the attacks and called for a thorough investigation, although it remains unclear who was responsible.

Beyond the tragic loss of life, there are at least four reasons why these incidents are significant. First, the circumstances of the attacks raise serious concerns about intent and targeting. The casualties occurred in three separate incidents. The first incident took place on March 30, when a projectile struck U.N. Post 7-1 near Adchit Al Qusayr. This post has served as the headquarters of Indonesia’s mechanized battalion since 2009. In this view, the post is not an obscure or temporary site; its location and role should be well known to both the IDF, Hezbollah, and other armed actors operating in southern Lebanon.

The second incident involved an explosion of “unknown origin” that hit a UNIFIL logistics convoy near Bani Hayyan on March 31. As with the attack on U.N. Post 7-1, this second fatal incident stands out because UNIFIL convoys, with their clearly marked white-painted vehicles, operate there on a routine basis.

The third incident happened on April 3 when a blast of unknown origin injured three Indonesian peacekeepers inside U.N. Post 9-63 near El Adeisse, which sits close to the U.N.-demarcated line separating Lebanon and Israel called the “Blue Line”. Similar to the first incident, this was not a random or temporary location. As an established UNIFIL position, its location and coordinates should be well-known.

Taken together, there is a big question about whether the Indonesian contingent may have been deliberately targeted, rather than simply caught in the crossfire. This speculation is not entirely new.

In October 2024, two Indonesian peacekeepers were injured after an Israeli tank fired at an observation tower at UNIFIL headquarters in Naqoura, an incident that also drew strong international condemnation. In the same year, Israel demanded that the U.N. pull its peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon. Additionally, on the same day that U.N. Post-71 was attacked, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the expansion of the Israeli military operation in southern Lebanon.

Meanwhile, U.N. reporting noted several occasions in which projectiles believed to have been fired by Hezbollah or affiliated groups struck UNIFIL positions, including the October 29, 2024, incident that injured four Austrian peacekeepers.

The second reason these events are significant is that for years, Indonesia has been UNIFIL’s largest troop contributor. The country is currently deploying around 755 personnel or 10 percent of the mission’s total manpower. Moreover, since 2009, Indonesia has continuously deployed a naval vessel to support the mission’s Maritime Task Force, a practice that continued until last year and further demonstrates its long-standing commitment to the mission. This makes UNIFIL Indonesia’s flagship peacekeeping mission, both operationally and symbolically. Some Indonesian legislators are now calling on the government to evaluate or even consider withdrawing Indonesian troops from Lebanon. However, as some observers recently argued, doing so might have wider consequences, including weakening the UNIFIL at a critical moment and undermining Indonesia’s hard-earned credibility in global peacekeeping.

Third, the deaths of Indonesian peacekeepers could have wider policy consequences by reinforcing Indonesia’s growing hesitation over its already highly controversial involvement in the U.S. President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace, of which Israel is also a member. Even before these incidents, Jakarta had already begun to distance itself from the Board following the U.S. and Israel strikes on Iran. For example, it has paused discussions on the initiative and postponed plans to send troops to Gaza as part of the board’s proposed International Stabilization Force.

If the deaths lead Indonesia to further distance itself from the Board, it could slow President Prabowo Subianto’s push for a more proactive foreign policy. Involvement in the Board has been central to his efforts to project Indonesia as a more influential global player, but the risks highlighted in Lebanon may force a more cautious approach. Ideally, this should serve as a reminder for Jakarta to ensure that any new commitments that it undertakes in the future – especially those involved in high-risk missions like the proposed International Stabilization Force – are both politically and operationally sustainable.

Furthermore, the deaths and injuries serve as a stark reminder of the real casualty risks involved when one deploys its force, even for a long-standing U.N.-mandated peacekeeping mission, in a volatile and fast-escalating region. Coupled with growing domestic condemnation – much of it directed at Israeli military operations in Lebanon – the incidents are likely to deepen Jakarta’s doubts about sending another peacekeeping force to the region.

Finally, there is also a practical question of whether such deployments are still feasible. If Jakarta chooses to proceed with sending troops to Gaza, it must invest in much stronger force protection, such as mine-resistant vehicles, hardened shelters, and improved base defense systems. While this would inevitably increase the logistical burden and financial cost of the mission, it is necessary to help prevent, or at least reduce, the likelihood of a similar tragedy experienced by its UNIFIL personnel, especially as ceasefire violations, including airstrikes and shelling, continued across the Gaza Strip.

In the end, the loss of Indonesian peacekeepers in Lebanon is more than a tragic loss. It puts Indonesia’s international role, credibility, and judgment under closer scrutiny, both at home and abroad. As Jakarta considers its next steps – whether in Lebanon or elsewhere in the Middle East – it must balance ambition with caution, and commitment with protection, for those decisions will determine how many Indonesian men and women in uniform will be asked to risk – and possibly lose – their lives.

Muhammad Fauzan Malufti

Muhammad Fauzan Malufti (@FMalufti) is an Indonesian defense analyst specializing in Indonesia’s national security affairs, with a particular focus on arms modernization, civil-military relations, defense diplomacy, and the defense industry.

Indonesia and Board of Peace

Indonesia foreign policy

Indonesia peacekeeping

UN peacekeeping operations

© The Diplomat