By Achmad Nur Hidayat*
When the State Wants to Be Stronger, Who Ensures It Does Not Become a Burden?
The biggest question arising from President Prabowo's speech is not merely whether Indonesia can become an advanced nation, or whether the 2027 Draft of State Budget is strong enough to finance the governments grand ambitions.
The more fundamental question is this: when the President wants the state to play a stronger role in managing natural resources, exports, food, cooperatives, free nutritious meals, Danantara, downstreaming, and social protection, is our state machinery clean, agile, and competent enough to carry such a major role?
Prabowo's speech carried a strong message of economic sovereignty. He emphasized that Indonesias natural wealth must no longer leak out, exports must not be manipulated through under invoicing and transfer pricing, export proceeds must be retained more substantially within the country, and Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution must be implemented consistently.
Yet, the idea of a strong state always has two sides. It can become an instrument for restoring economic sovereignty, but it can also turn into a bureaucracy that grows more powerful, slower, and more vulnerable to creating new rents. This is where the potential problem lies.
Indonesia does need a strong state. However, a strong state must not mean a fatter bureaucracy, longer licensing procedures, more dominant state-owned enterprises without accountability, and citizens as well as businesses facing more administrative desks.
A strong state must mean a state capable of protecting the public interest, closing the leaks in national wealth, enforcing the law, accelerating public services, and ensuring that every rupiah of the nations wealth returns to the people.
A Speech That Challenges Indonesia's Paradox
