Last week, a Chinese delegation of human rights experts arrived in Indonesia for a six-day mission to promote what Beijing calls its “contemporary human rights perspective.” Organized by the China Society for Human Rights Studies, the delegation presented China’s narrative on respecting and protecting human rights, the priorities set out at the 20th Chinese Communist Party Congress, and its national human rights action plans.
Indonesian experts reportedly praised China’s achievements and expressed eagerness for deeper cooperation. The delegation emphasized the need for the global south to unite in addressing global human rights challenges.
On the surface, the mission appeared harmonious — a smooth exchange of ideas and mutual appreciation.
However, the vision projected during this “successful mission” is difficult to reconcile with the complex human rights realities in both countries. When governments with unresolved and serious rights concerns endorse each other’s narratives without question, the result is not genuine dialogue. It becomes a carefully staged performance that avoids confronting the issues that matter most.
For China, the story presented in Jakarta last week stands in stark contrast to what continues to unfold in Xinjiang. Allegations of mass detention, coercive political indoctrination, pervasive surveillance, and restrictions on cultural and religious life persist, while independent access to the region remains tightly controlled. China insists its policies maintain stability and development, yet meaningful transparency — the foundation of credibility — remains absent.
Indonesia, although far more open politically, also struggles with significant human rights challenges that cannot simply be set aside in a diplomatic exchange. Freedom of expression remains fragile. Journalists and human rights defenders face intimidation and harassment, and the deadly arson attack on a journalist’s family home in North Sumatra earlier this year exposed the profound risks faced by the media.
Security forces have also been accused of using excessive force in handling protests, particularly those connected with land disputes or opposition to controversial legislation. Protesters have been injured, detained without clear justification, or subjected to heavy-handed crowd control. Impunity for abuses by police and officials remains a longstanding problem, eroding trust in institutions tasked with protecting rights.
These realities — different in nature, but similar in their lack of accountability — make last week’s warm, uncritical praise all the more troubling. A human rights dialogue that avoids scrutiny of these issues is not a dialogue. It is mutual endorsement.
The global south does have a meaningful role in shaping a more inclusive and equitable human rights discourse. However, realizing that vision requires honesty and accountability, not merely expressions of solidarity or repeated assurances of shared values.
Beijing’s delegation promoted China’s approach as a model anchored in stability, development and national priorities. Indonesian participants responded with commendations. Yet unaddressed in these exchanges was the fact that both countries face ongoing and serious questions about transparency, accountability and the protection of basic freedoms. China cannot credibly present itself as a human rights leader while preventing independent scrutiny in Xinjiang. Indonesia cannot meaningfully engage in such exchanges while attacks on journalists continue and security force abuses remain unresolved.
A pathway toward genuine mutual learning would require each side to acknowledge uncomfortable truths. China would need to grant independent access to contested regions. Indonesia would need to ensure that attacks on journalists are thoroughly investigated and that security personnel are held accountable when they violate the law. Both would need to strengthen the space for civil society and independent voices — not just state-sanctioned experts.
Without this honesty, last week’s mission would be remembered not as a step forward, but as another example of governments congratulating each other while sidestepping the issues that most urgently need attention. The language of human rights loses its substance when stripped of accountability. If China and Indonesia want their engagement to matter, they must begin by facing the realities that their own citizens know all too well.
Muhammad Zulfikar Rakhmat is director of the China-Indonesia Desk at the Center of Economic and Law Studies in Jakarta. Yeta Purnama is a researcher at the China-Indonesia Desk at the Center of Economic and Law Studies.
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has
“Of course you can choose not to be Taiwanese, just do not stay here,” chairwoman of Taipei 101 operator Taipei Financial Center Corp Janet Chia (賈永婕) said in an online interview with local entertainer Tai Chih-yuan (邰智源), triggering intense discussion on social media, with politicians across party lines weighing in. In the interview, which was aired on May 14, Chia and Tai’s discussion over a meal in Taipei 101 covered Chia’s career change from entertainer to chairwoman and US climber Alex Honnold’s free solo climb up the Taipei 101 building. During the interview, Chia said, “Being on this land, we