Introduction: A delicate reset after unrest
When Prabowo Subianto took the helm as Indonesia’s president in October 2024, the nation faced a volatile mix of economic pressures, regional security concerns, and a public appetite for decisive leadership. The early months saw the administration pivot toward a blend of continuity with change—promising stability while pursuing targeted reforms. This article examines how Prabowo attempted to regain public trust after a period of unrest and what factors could determine whether that trust endures or erodes again.
What sparked the urgency for trust
The unrest that preceded the new administration left many voters wary of sudden policy reversals and opaque decision-making. Critics argued that previous leadership fizzled on implementation, while supporters praised a decisive posture and a sharper focus on national sovereignty and security. In this climate, trust was less about charisma and more about the government’s ability to deliver tangible improvements—jobs, price stability, public safety, and credible governance. Prabowo’s challenge was to translate campaign promises into concrete outcomes without appearing to abandon core principles.
Key moves that aimed to rebuild confidence
Several strands defined the early strategy to restore trust:
- Policy clarity and execution. The administration emphasized clear policy directions, publishing timelines for major reforms in the economy, energy, and infrastructure sectors. Transparent updates, even when facing setbacks, helped counteract perceptions of opacity.
- Economic stabilization and growth. With inflation fluctuating and domestic demand under pressure, the government pursued targeted subsidies, investment incentives, and measures to ease regulatory bottlenecks. The goal was to demonstrate that leadership could translate into everyday relief and longer-term prosperity.
- Public safety and social cohesion. Security and rule of law remained central. A visible emphasis on crime reduction, disaster resilience, and community policing sought to reassure citizens that the state would protect the vulnerable while maintaining order.
- Dialogue with civil society and critics. The administration opened channels for dialogue, inviting business leaders, academics, journalists, and opposition voices to participate in policy debates. This approach aimed to reduce suspicion and showcase a government willing to listen and adjust.
Geopolitical and domestic pressures that shape the outlook
Indonesia’s domestic stability is intertwined with its regional role and economic health. External challenges—from global energy prices to supply chain diversification—test the durability of any leadership’s public backing. Domestically, diverse regional interests, religious and ethnic dynamics, and competing media narratives require careful navigation. The administration’s credibility hinges on delivering consistent results across provinces while avoiding overpromising on complex reform agendas.
Public sentiment: measuring the pulse
Polls and social listening in the first year of Prabowo’s presidency revealed cautious optimism in certain urban and industrial hubs, tempered by skepticism in regions hit hardest by inflation or unemployment. The president’s allies argue that the gains in investor confidence and improved public services will gradually translate into durable trust. Critics warn that without sustained momentum, short-lived policy wins could quickly fade as new scandals or economic headwinds emerge.
What could threaten the durability of trust?
Several risk factors loom that could undermine the hard-won goodwill:
- Policy fatigue. If reforms stall or produce uneven benefits, public patience could wane.
- Corruption and governance gaps. Any hint of cronyism or weak enforcement would erode confidence faster than policy successes could build it.
- Economic shocks. A sudden drop in growth, higher unemployment, or price spikes would test the administration’s crisis-management credibility.
- Opposition dynamics. A resilient opposition capable of presenting credible alternatives could fragment public support, especially if governing promises are perceived as unfulfilled.
Looking ahead
Prabowo’s ability to sustain trust will depend on consistent results, transparent governance, and the perception that feedback from citizens leads to actionable change. If the administration can maintain momentum on economic stabilization, deliver concrete infrastructure and security improvements, and keep channels of dialogue open, public confidence may endure. Conversely, stalled reforms or perceived missteps could reopen the door to doubt and competition for the electorate’s allegiance.
Conclusion
Indonesia’s post-unrest phase offers a test of leadership legitimacy in a vibrant democracy. Prabowo’s early efforts to blend continuity with reform aimed to reassure a diverse nation. Whether that reassurance becomes a lasting trust will hinge on sustained delivery, governance integrity, and the administration’s ability to adapt in a rapidly shifting political and economic landscape.
