The people expect their leaders to demonstrate sensitivity and appropriateness when traveling abroad.
In Indonesia, a former diplomat has raised a quiet but pointed question about the nature of leadership in uncertain times: how much of governance is presence, and how much is performance? Dino Patti Djalal, founder of the Foreign Policy Community of Indonesia, has urged President Prabowo Subianto to reconsider a travel pace that has made him the world's most frequently traveling head of state, arguing that the financial and political costs of constant overseas visits now outweigh their diplomatic returns. His critique arrives not as partisan attack but as a call for proportion — a reminder that restraint, too, is a form of statecraft.
- President Prabowo has spent roughly one in every six days abroad, with each trip costing tens to hundreds of billions of rupiah in logistics, security, and delegation expenses.
- The optics have grown difficult: presidential visits to Pakistan and Russia proceeded without public notice even as floods devastated Sumatra, deepening public unease about misplaced priorities.
- Djalal's critique cuts beyond cost — bilateral meetings that last one or two hours are surrounded by ceremonies and formalities that consume resources without producing proportional diplomatic value.
- He has proposed five concrete alternatives: video calls, consolidating meetings at multilateral forums, advance public disclosure of travel plans, receiving more foreign leaders at home, and delegating routine missions to Foreign Minister Sugiono.
- The conversation itself marks a shift — Indonesians are no longer awed by diplomatic grandeur, and the president's travel habits have become a symbol of fiscal and political accountability that the public is now openly demanding.
President Prabowo Subianto has become, by one credible account, the most frequently traveling head of state in the world — spending roughly one of every six days outside Indonesia. Dino Patti Djalal, a former deputy foreign minister and founder of the Foreign Policy Community of Indonesia, has made the arithmetic public: each overseas trip carries a price tag in the tens or hundreds of billions of rupiah, covering advance teams, security, hotels, and per diem costs for entire delegations. When he examined what these trips actually produce, he found that most bilateral meetings last only one or two hours, with the rest consumed by ceremonies that could happen elsewhere — or not at all.
Djalal offered five alternatives in a widely circulated Instagram video. The simplest: use video calls. He pointed to Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, who has spoken with Donald Trump seventeen times by phone without a single formal bilateral visit, despite the two countries being each other's largest trading partners. His second proposal was to consolidate diplomacy at existing forums — when Prabowo attends Davos, the UN, ASEAN, or the G20, he should deliver his remarks and then meet with eight other attending leaders in one location, eliminating the need for separate state visits entirely. Djalal called this the 'Formula 1 plus 8,' noting with dry humor that eight happens to be Prabowo's favorite number.
His remaining suggestions addressed transparency and delegation. Some trips — including visits to Pakistan and Russia during the Sumatra floods — were announced without public notice or clear strategic rationale, eroding trust. Djalal urged that travel plans be disclosed at least a week in advance. He also pointed to Xi Jinping's model of receiving foreign leaders in Beijing rather than traveling constantly abroad, a posture that projects stability rather than restlessness. Finally, he proposed delegating routine diplomatic missions to Foreign Minister Sugiono, whose smaller entourage would achieve comparable results at a fraction of the cost.
What drives the critique is not accounting alone. Djalal framed it as a reflection of public mood: Indonesians facing global instability and domestic hardship are no longer moved by diplomatic spectacle. They want evidence of judgment and restraint. Whether Prabowo adjusts course remains to be seen, but the fact that this conversation is now happening openly suggests the political cost of constant travel has become as real as the financial one.
President Prabowo Subianto has a travel problem, and it's costing Indonesia dearly. According to Dino Patti Djalal, the founder of the Foreign Policy Community of Indonesia and a former deputy foreign minister, the president has become the world's most frequently traveling head of state—spending roughly one out of every six days abroad. The criticism stings because the numbers are real: each overseas trip carries a price tag in the tens or hundreds of billions of rupiah, covering everything from advance teams and security details to hotel rooms, meals, and daily allowances for the entire delegation.
Djalal laid out the math in a video posted to Instagram, and the arithmetic is hard to ignore. A single state visit requires flights, accommodations, logistics, protocol staff, security personnel, and the accumulated per diem costs of dozens of officials. Yet when Djalal examined what actually happens during these trips, he found something troubling: most bilateral meetings last only one or two hours, with the remainder consumed by formal dinners, ceremonies, and rituals that could easily happen elsewhere—or not at all.
He offered five concrete alternatives, starting with the simplest: use video calls. Djalal pointed to Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, who has called U.S. President Donald Trump seventeen times without ever scheduling a formal bilateral meeting, despite Mexico being America's largest trading partner. The substance of diplomacy, he argued, survives the transition to Zoom. The savings—potentially hundreds of billions per trip—would be immediate and substantial. Beyond cost, there is a political dimension: in a moment when Indonesians are worried about global instability and domestic crises like the Sumatra floods, the optics of expensive foreign travel feel tone-deaf.
Djalal's second suggestion was to consolidate meetings at existing international forums. When Prabowo attended the UN General Assembly in New York, Finnish President Alexander Stubb requested a bilateral meeting that went unanswered. Similarly, at the recent ASEAN summit in Cebu, a request from another Southeast Asian leader for a directed meeting with Prabowo was ignored. Djalal proposed what he called the "Formula 1 plus 8"—when the president attends major gatherings like Davos, the UN, ASEAN, or the G20, he should deliver his speech and then meet with eight other attending leaders, all in one location, all without the expense of separate state visits. The number eight, Djalal noted with a touch of humor, is Prabowo's favorite number.
The remaining three suggestions targeted planning, precedent, and delegation. Djalal criticized the spontaneity of some presidential trips—visits to Pakistan and Russia during the Sumatra floods, for instance, announced without public notice or clear strategic purpose. He urged the Cabinet Secretary or Foreign Minister to announce travel plans at least a week in advance, in coordination with the host country, to restore transparency and accountability. He also pointed to Chinese President Xi Jinping's model: receiving more state guests in Beijing than traveling abroad, a posture that projects stability and command rather than restlessness. Finally, Djalal suggested delegating routine diplomatic missions to Foreign Minister Sugiono, whose smaller entourage would cost far less while achieving similar results—provided the Foreign Minister operated independently rather than as part of the presidential retinue.
What animates Djalal's critique is not mere bean-counting. He framed his suggestions as reflecting the mood of ordinary Indonesians, who are no longer impressed by diplomatic grandeur and instead expect their leaders to demonstrate restraint and good judgment. In an era of global uncertainty and domestic strain, the president's frequent absences and the bills they generate have become a symbol of misplaced priorities. Whether Prabowo will heed the advice remains unclear, but the conversation itself signals that the cost of constant travel—both financial and political—is now a matter of public reckoning.
Citações Notáveis
In our calculations, among all world leaders, President Prabowo has become the head of state who travels abroad the most frequently.— Dino Patti Djalal
The people expect their leaders to demonstrate sensitivity and appropriateness when traveling abroad.— Dino Patti Djalal
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does Djalal think video calls would actually work? Isn't there something about face-to-face diplomacy that matters?
There is, but he's saying the substance happens in those one or two hours of actual negotiation. The rest—the banquets, the ceremonies, the photo ops—that's theater. A video call captures the substance without the theater. And the precedent exists: Sheinbaum has called Trump seventeen times without meeting him in person.
But doesn't it look bad if the president is always on Zoom? Doesn't that signal weakness or disengagement?
That's the political risk, yes. But Djalal's argument is that the opposite is true right now—constant travel looks extravagant when people are worried about floods and global instability. Restraint, in this moment, reads as strength and sensitivity.
The "Formula 1 plus 8" idea—that seems clever but also a bit gimmicky. Why would other leaders agree to meet him in a group setting instead of one-on-one?
Because they're already there. At the UN, at ASEAN, at Davos—these forums bring dozens of leaders together. Bilateral meetings happen in the margins anyway. Djalal is saying: stop flying to separate countries for those meetings. Have them in the margins of forums you're already attending. It's efficient, not diminished.
What about the Foreign Minister delegation idea? Doesn't that risk making the president look less important?
Only if you measure importance by how much you travel. Djalal points to Xi Jinping—arguably the most powerful leader in the world—who stays in Beijing and receives visitors. The president's power doesn't depend on his passport stamps. It depends on what he actually accomplishes.
So this is really about signaling that the government understands what people care about right now?
Exactly. Djalal says the people are no longer impressed by diplomatic protocol. They want to see their leader demonstrate judgment about where his attention should be. That's the real message.