Indonesia's first aircraft carrier sparks debate over cost and necessity

Indonesia's navy now has its first aircraft carrier, a 41-year-old Italian warship that arrived at Jakarta's Tanjung Priok port on a Friday morning in September, greeted by military ceremony. The ship, formerly named ITS Giuseppe Garibaldi and retired from Italian service in 2024, will be formally commissioned into the Indonesian Navy as KRI Gajah Mada, named after a 14th-century military leader whose vision of a unified archipelago resonates deeply in Indonesian national memory. The transfer makes Indonesia only the second country in Southeast Asia to operate a carrier—Thailand acquired one from Spain in 1997, though it has spent much of its service life idle in port.

Italy's decision to gift the vessel rather than bear the cost of decommissioning it served multiple purposes. The Italian government was simultaneously pursuing defence contracts with Indonesia for submarines and aircraft, making the carrier transfer part of a broader military engagement strategy. For Indonesia's newly installed president Prabowo Subianto, the acquisition fit squarely within his administration's stated priority of military expansion. His government has been acquiring submarines, frigates, and fighter jets while pushing for expanded defence partnerships across multiple countries.

The government's official case for the carrier rests on two pillars: maritime security across Indonesia's vast archipelago and disaster response. Prabowo has emphasized the vessel's capacity to carry up to ten medium-sized helicopters—aircraft comparable to Black Hawks and Mi-17s—equipped to fight the forest and peatland fires that regularly blanket Southeast Asia with hazardous smoke. The carrier could serve as a mobile command centre and support hub for helicopters and drones, rapidly deployable to areas struck by natural disasters, which are frequent in a nation sitting within the Pacific Ring of Fire.

Yet the acquisition has ignited sharp debate among defence analysts, economists, and opposition lawmakers who question both the necessity and the true cost. Indonesia's finance ministry approved $450 million in financing for the carrier program in 2025, but some members of parliament warn the actual bill could be substantially higher. TB Hasanuddin, a member of the parliamentary Commission I, has stated that retrofitting costs alone could reach 16 trillion rupiah—approximately $900 million. These figures arrive at a moment when Indonesia's economy faces mounting fiscal pressure. The government is funding a free nutritious meals program that has been marred by multiple food poisoning incidents, while economists warn of slowing growth, weaker state revenues, and tightening budget constraints.

Muhammad Fauzan Malufti of the Center for Strategic and International Studies has argued that the acquisition must be grounded in genuine operational necessity rather than national pride. He emphasizes that policymakers must account not only for the vessel's purchase and modernization costs but also for the sustained expenses of operation—personnel, maintenance, fuel, weapons systems, and supporting infrastructure. He points to Thailand's carrier as a cautionary example: despite being commissioned in 1997, it has spent much of its operational life in port due to budget and operational constraints. Malufti has stated plainly that if the benefits do not justify the costs, the money might be better directed toward increasing the number of frigates in the fleet.

Military analyst Khairul Fahmi of the Institute for Security and Strategic Studies argues that aircraft carriers are not a priority for Indonesia's actual defence needs. The country's focus should be preventing adversaries from operating freely in its territorial waters—a mission better served by submarines, frigates, and asymmetric weapons systems. Yet Fahmi acknowledges a secondary argument: if Indonesia intends to position itself as a major maritime power, a carrier can function as both a symbol of national standing and a multifunctional platform capable of supporting diverse military and non-military operations.

The fundamental tension remains unresolved. The government has articulated a vision for the carrier as a tool for maritime operations and disaster relief across an archipelago of thousands of islands. But experts have questioned whether Indonesia's leadership has genuinely calculated whether the vessel is necessary for those missions, or whether the decision was driven by other considerations. The carrier will be formally commissioned next week. What remains to be seen is whether the government can sustain its operations without the costs overwhelming the stated benefits—or whether this vessel, like Thailand's before it, will spend more time in port than at sea.