Jakarta’s recent embrace of trade and cultural partnerships with China’s Xinjiang region marks a significant step in deepening bilateral ties, with trade figures soaring to nearly $63 billion in the first five months of 2025. Yet, as Indonesian business leaders and officials celebrate mutual respect and economic opportunities, a shadow looms over these engagements: Xinjiang’s global reputation as a site of alleged human rights abuses against Uyghur Muslims. For Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation, this partnership raises profound questions about balancing economic imperatives with moral responsibility.
Trade Milestones Amid Controversy
This month, the Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin) welcomed representatives from Xinjiang’s state-linked enterprises, heralding the event as a landmark in trade relations. Discussions between executives from Jakarta and Urumqi, the capital of Xinjiang, focused on strengthening supply chains and exploring new avenues for collaboration. The Chinese ambassador in Jakarta emphasized the robust growth in bilateral trade, a figure that underscores China’s critical role in Indonesia’s economic landscape.
Beyond commerce, the agreements signed during this engagement extend into education and culture. A memorandum of understanding between Universitas Al Azhar Indonesia and Tarim University in Xinjiang aims to foster academic exchanges, while talks of halal food cooperation highlight a shared cultural narrative. These initiatives, however, are not without context. They align with Beijing’s broader strategy to reshape international perceptions of Xinjiang, pivoting the narrative from repression to resilience and prosperity, particularly among Muslim-majority nations like Indonesia. 
Xinjiang, located in China’s far-western region, has long been a focal point of global concern due to allegations of mass surveillance, arbitrary detentions, and forced assimilation targeting its Uyghur Muslim population. Reports from international human rights organizations detail systemic abuses, including the demolition of mosques and the separation of families. While Beijing frames its policies as counterterrorism and development efforts, the scale and nature of these measures have drawn widespread condemnation from Western governments and advocacy groups.
Indonesia’s Economic Dependence on China
For Indonesia, the allure of partnership with China, including its Xinjiang-based entities, is rooted in economic necessity. China has emerged as a cornerstone of Indonesia’s development agenda, providing substantial funding for infrastructure projects and supporting industrialization across sectors such as energy, agriculture, logistics, and technology. These investments are pivotal to President Prabowo Subianto’s ambitious Indonesia Emas 2045 vision, which seeks to position the country among the world’s top five economies by its centennial independence celebration.
Achieving this goal demands massive capital inflows and strategic collaborations, areas where China has proven indispensable. From high-speed rail projects to energy grids, Chinese financing has accelerated Indonesia’s growth trajectory, reinforcing the perception that deeper ties with Beijing are non-negotiable. In this calculus, Xinjiang is presented not merely as an economic partner but as a region with cultural and religious affinities, a framing that Beijing leverages to strengthen its influence under the guise of mutual progress.
Yet, this pragmatic approach comes with trade-offs. The Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (XPCC), a key player in these new agreements, is a state-run conglomerate with deep ties to China’s Communist Party and regional security apparatus. Sanctioned by the United States and other nations for its alleged involvement in human rights violations, the XPCC’s role in demographic engineering and repression in Xinjiang is well-documented by international watchdogs. For Indonesia, aligning with such an entity risks not only complicity but also significant reputational damage on the global stage.
Domestic Pressures and Moral Dilemmas
While economic benefits are clear, Indonesia’s engagement with Xinjiang does not go unchallenged at home. Many Indonesians, who identify strongly with the global Muslim community or ummah, are increasingly aware of the plight of Uyghur Muslims. Civil society organizations, Islamic groups, and student activists have periodically called on the government to address China’s policies in Xinjiang more directly. These voices argue that Indonesia, as a leading Muslim nation, has a moral obligation to advocate for fellow Muslims facing persecution.
Historically, Jakarta has opted for discretion over confrontation. Successive administrations have avoided public criticism of Beijing, prioritizing economic stability and diplomatic restraint. Under President Prabowo’s leadership, this cautious stance appears even more pronounced, with the focus squarely on partnerships that can deliver tangible growth. Public statements from officials often sidestep the human rights dimension, emphasizing instead the potential for trade and cultural exchange to bridge divides.
However, this silence is not without consequence. By engaging with Xinjiang without addressing the underlying issues, Indonesia risks sending a message of indifference to the struggles of Uyghur Muslims. For a nation that has often positioned itself as a moral voice in the Islamic world, uncritical partnerships with entities linked to repression could undermine its credibility. The tension between economic pragmatism and ethical responsibility lies at the heart of Indonesia’s current dilemma.
A Broader Strategy of Influence
Indonesia’s deepening ties with Xinjiang must also be viewed through the lens of China’s global ambitions. Beijing has invested heavily in rebranding Xinjiang, particularly to audiences in the Muslim world who might otherwise be skeptical of its policies. By emphasizing agricultural potential, cultural exchanges, and economic inclusivity, China seeks to shift focus away from allegations of internment camps and religious suppression. Partnerships with nations like Indonesia serve as a powerful tool in this narrative-building exercise, lending legitimacy to Beijing’s portrayal of Xinjiang as a region of opportunity rather than oppression.
Educational collaborations, such as the agreement between Universitas Al Azhar Indonesia and Tarim University, are emblematic of this soft power approach. While presented as benign academic exchanges, these initiatives unfold in a region where independent scrutiny is severely restricted. Indonesian institutions and policymakers are undoubtedly aware that such partnerships risk being co-opted into a broader campaign to normalize conditions in Xinjiang, yet the promise of mutual benefit often overshadows these concerns.
Navigating Risks and Responsibilities
As Indonesia forges ahead with its Xinjiang engagements, the risks of reputational harm and ethical compromise loom large. Aligning with state-linked entities like the XPCC, whose track record is marred by allegations of abuse, could taint Indonesia’s international standing, particularly among nations and groups advocating for human rights. Moreover, the lack of transparency surrounding conditions in Xinjiang means that Indonesian partners operate in a context of uncertainty, unable to independently verify the ethical implications of their collaborations.
One potential path forward lies in conditional engagement. Jakarta could insist on greater transparency as a prerequisite for deepened ties, advocating for access by independent observers to assess conditions in Xinjiang. Such a stance would signal that economic cooperation need not come at the expense of accountability. By coupling partnerships with clear safeguards, Indonesia could mitigate the risk of appearing complicit in repression while still pursuing the benefits of collaboration.
Additionally, Indonesia must weigh the long-term implications of its current trajectory. Economic prosperity is a worthy goal, but history often judges nations not solely by their wealth but by the values they uphold. For a country aspiring to global leadership by 2045, the question of moral responsibility cannot be sidelined. Engaging with Xinjiang without addressing the human rights context may yield short-term gains, but it could erode Indonesia’s standing as a principled actor on the world stage.
The Road Ahead
As Indonesia navigates its complex relationship with China and Xinjiang, the stakes extend beyond trade figures and infrastructure projects. The partnerships forged today will shape not only the nation’s economic future but also its identity as a global leader. While the promise of growth is undeniable, so too is the need for a clear-eyed approach to the political and ethical dimensions of these ties.
The challenge for Jakarta lies in finding a balance—pursuing economic opportunities without sacrificing the values that define Indonesia’s role in the Muslim world and beyond. As the nation accelerates toward its 2045 vision, the choices made now will echo far into the future, raising the question: at what cost does progress come?
