National Media Framing of Indonesia’s Accession to the Board of Peace

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21111/dauliyah.v11i2.14

Keywords:

Board of Peace, Gaza, Indonesian Foreign Policy, Media Framing

Abstract

This study examines the framing by Indonesian national media of Indonesia's decision to join the Board of Peace (BoP) as a novel diplomatic avenue concerning the Gaza issue. This study used a qualitative-descriptive methodology utilizing NVivo for matrix coding queries to analyze the tone of news coverage (positive, neutral, negative) and its implications for the formulation of foreign policy meaning. The research results indicate distinct differences in framing among media channels. Kompas predominantly adopts a positive tone, which reinforces the legitimacy of the government's actions as “advocacy from within” and underscores its ongoing pro-Palestinian stance. Tempo exhibits a more moderate tone, suggesting a propensity for careful and informative reporting regarding the prospects and institutional ramifications of BoP. The Jakarta Post exhibits a greater degree of balance, presenting a conflict between narratives of potential influence and apprehensions regarding normative hazards. These findings affirm that Indonesia's membership to BoP serves as a platform for the generation of contentious interpretations within the domestic media landscape.


References

Annisarahma, R., & Assegaf, A. H. (2024). Analisis framing pemberitaan media online Tempo.co dan CNNIndonesia.com mengenai konflik Israel–Hamas pada Oktober 2023. Syntax Literate: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia, 9(6), 3343–3357. https://doi.org/10.36418/syntax-literate.v9i6.15765

Antara News. (2026a). Indonesia and seven nations join Board of Peace for Gaza. Retrieved from https://en.antaranews.com/news/401002/indonesia-and-seven-nations-join-board-of-peace-for-gaza

Antara News. (2026b). The House of Representatives considers the peace council to be Indonesia’s alternative diplomatic route for Gaza. Retrieved from https://www.antaranews.com/berita/5380402/dpr-nilai-board-of-peace-jadi-jalur-diplomasi-alternatif-ri-untuk-gaza

Baroncelli, E. (2024). Governing complexity in complex times: The HDP nexus and the role of the UN, the EU and the World Bank. The International Spectator, 59(3), 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2024.2376041

Carol, D.-K. (2026). From ambiguous governance to stabilization failure in Gaza: The limits of the Board of Peace. Retrieved from https://theglobalobservatory.org/2026/02/from-ambiguous-governance-to-stabilization-failure-in-gaza-the-limits-of-the-board-of-peace/

Durnová, A. (2022). Making interpretive policy analysis critical and societally relevant: Emotions, ethnography and language. Policy & Politics, 50(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16129850569011

Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, M., & Westerwinter, O. (2022). The global governance complexity cube: Varieties of institutional complexity in global governance. The Review of International Organizations, 17(2), 233–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-021-09449-7

Entman, R. M. (2007). Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x

Roger, C., & Rowan, S. (2023). The new terrain of global governance: Mapping membership in informal international organizations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 67(6), 1248–1269. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027221139431

Sekretariat Kabinet Republik Indonesia. (2026). Indonesia tegaskan komitmen perdamaian Palestina melalui keikutsertaan dalam Board of Peace. Retrieved from https://setkab.go.id/indonesia-tegaskan-komitmen-perdamaian-palestina-melalui-keikutsertaan-dalam-board-of-peace/

Sellita. (2026). Indonesia at the Board of Peace: Realistic choice or subtle coercion? Modern Diplomacy.

Setiawati, S. M. (2024). The role of Indonesian government in Middle East conflict resolution: Consistent diplomacy or strategic shifts? Frontiers in Political Science, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2024.1304108

Sidlo, K. (2026). The Board of Peace, Gaza, and the cost of being inside the room. Retrieved from https://www.iss.europa.eu/publications/commentary/board-peace-gaza-and-cost-being-inside-room

Southey, S. (2025). The Security Council as architect? Resolution 2803, the Board of Peace, and the limits of transition in Gaza.

Susilawati, S., Yusuf, R., & Rachman, A. (2024). Indonesia’s free and active foreign policy is the basis for realizing world peace. Indonesian Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Science and Technology, 2(3), 309–318. https://doi.org/10.55927/marcopolo.v2i3.8528

Süsler, B., & Alden, C. (2025). Brokering peace: Emerging middle powers, agency and mediation. Global Policy. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.70100

UK Parliament. (2026). Gaza 2026: Board of Peace and national transitional committee.

United Nations. (2025). US vetoes Security Council resolution demanding permanent ceasefire in Gaza. Retrieved from https://www.ungeneva.org/en/news-media/news/2025/06/107048/us-vetoes-security-council-resolution-demanding-permanent-ceasefire

Wikman, L. (2024). Entrepreneurial frame alignment: Framing foreign policy change under a veil of continuity. Foreign Policy Analysis, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.1093/fpa/orae021

Downloads

Submitted

2026-02-21

Accepted

2026-03-07

Published

2026-02-28

How to Cite

Efendi, I. A., & Pambagyo, W. D. (2026). National Media Framing of Indonesia’s Accession to the Board of Peace. Dauliyah Journal of Islamic and International Affairs, 11(1), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.21111/dauliyah.v11i2.14