National Media Framing of Indonesia’s Accession to the Board of Peace
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21111/dauliyah.v11i2.14Keywords:
Board of Peace, Gaza, Indonesian Foreign Policy, Media FramingAbstract
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
Accepted
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Imas Ananta Efendi, Wahyu Dwi Pambagyo

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.









