The Democratic Party is calling on the Indonesian government to urgently review the deployment of national troops in Southern Lebanon, urging a serious consideration of a proposal by the country’s sixth president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY), to prioritize soldier safety over the current UNIFIL mandate.
The push for a comprehensive evaluation comes after the deaths of three TNI (Indonesian National Armed Forces) personnel, victims of Israeli attacks in the region. Anton Sukartono Suratto, Vice Chairman of Commission I of the House of Representatives (DPR) from the Democratic Party, stated on Monday, April 6, 2026, that the state has a fundamental responsibility to protect its citizens serving abroad when the environment shifts from a peacekeeping mission to an active combat zone.
At the heart of the debate is the usulan SBY soal pasukan TNI di UNIFIL, which suggests that the United Nations should either halt the UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) assignment entirely or relocate peacekeepers to areas far removed from the current hostilities. The proposal argues that the nature of the conflict in Southern Lebanon has evolved beyond the scope of traditional peacekeeping.
The Distinction Between Peacekeeping and Active Conflict
The core of the concern lies in the operational definition of the “Blue Line”—the border area between Lebanon and Israel where Indonesian contingents are stationed. According to SBY, peacekeepers are intended to operate in “blue zones” or “post-conflict” areas to maintain stability, not within active “war zones” where they risk becoming collateral damage in high-intensity military operations.
Anton Sukartono Suratto echoed this sentiment, emphasizing that Indonesian troops are deployed to support peace, not to engage in warfare. He argued that the current volatility in Southern Lebanon renders the mission’s original premise obsolete, potentially placing soldiers in untenable positions.
“Pasukan Indonesia hadir bukan untuk berperang, melainkan untuk menjaga stabilitas dan mendukung proses perdamaian di kawasan konflik. Pasukan perdamaian seharusnya hadir di area post-conflict, bukan saat terjadinya konflik,” Anton told reporters.
The Democratic Party suggests that the government evaluate three primary options to mitigate further loss of life: a complete withdrawal of forces, a temporary suspension of the mission, or the immediate relocation of troops to safer sectors within the region.
International Humanitarian Law and the Status of Peacekeepers
The call for evaluation is not merely a political move but is grounded in the principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Under these global standards, UN peacekeepers are granted a protected status. They are not legitimate military targets and should not be directly impacted by military operations.
The Democratic Party argues that when peacekeepers are repeatedly targeted or caught in the crossfire of state-level military engagements, the protective status afforded by the UN is effectively neutralized. This failure of protection, they argue, necessitates a strategic pivot by the Indonesian government to ensure the safety of the Kontingen Garuda (Garuda Contingent).
SBY highlighted this danger in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Sunday, April 5, noting that the current situation makes peacekeepers vulnerable to becoming casualties of ongoing battles at any moment. He urged the UN headquarters in New York to capture decisive action to move forces out of the “burning” battlefield.
Strategic Implications for Indonesia
Indonesia has long been a proud contributor to UN Peacekeeping operations, using these missions to project diplomatic influence and provide critical field experience for its military. But, the current crisis in Lebanon presents a tension between international commitment and the domestic duty of care.
The proposed evaluation involves weighing the diplomatic cost of a potential withdrawal against the human cost of continued deployment. For the Democratic Party, the responsibility of the state to its soldiers outweighs the prestige of the mission.
| Option | Objective | Primary Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Full Withdrawal | Complete removal of TNI troops | Mission no longer meets “post-conflict” criteria |
| Relocation | Move to safer zones | Removal from the immediate “Blue Line” combat area |
| Temporary Suspension | Pause mission activities | Guarantee immediate safety during peak hostilities |
The Path Forward
The Democratic Party is now urging the Indonesian government to coordinate with the UN to determine if the UNIFIL mandate can be adjusted to ensure that peacekeepers are not positioned in areas of active combat. They maintain that a comprehensive evaluation is the only responsible path forward to prevent further tragedies.
As the situation in Southern Lebanon remains volatile, the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense are expected to provide updates on the safety protocols and the current status of the troops on the ground. The next critical checkpoint will be the government’s formal response to the DPR’s request for a mission evaluation.
We invite our readers to share their perspectives on the balance between international peacekeeping duties and soldier safety in the comments section below.
