Business in Diplomacy: Catharina Widjaja

Business in Diplomacy is a Foreign Policy Talks series that puts the spotlight on the business leaders who sit at the intersection of commerce and statecraft. Through in-depth conversations, we explore how they read the geopolitical landscape, how they engage governments and international partners, and what they believe it takes for Indonesia to compete, connect, and grow in an uncertain global order.

This edition features Catharina Widjaja, CEO of Alun Alun Indonesia, Subsidiary of MAP Group.

---

Q&A

Q1:

In your view, what distinguishes economic diplomacy from commercial diplomacy in Indonesia’s context? How do you see your role, and perhaps the role of your chamber, in supporting Indonesia’s trajectory in advancing these efforts?

I understand that economic diplomacy is the broader strategic framework. It is about how Indonesia positions its national economic interests globally, in trade, investment, supply chains, energy, food security, technology, and industrial competitiveness.

Meanwhile, commercial diplomacy is more practical. It converts diplomatic relations into concrete business outcomes: investment deals, market access, business matching, and problem-solving for investors.

For chambers and business associations, our role is to become an enabler. Government opens doors through G2G (government-to-government) relations, while the private sector helps convert those openings into investment, jobs, and long-term economic value.

Indonesia has strong momentum. Investment realization rose from Rp1,418.9 trillion in 2023 to Rp1,714.2 trillion in 2024, growing 20.8% year-on-year. This reinforces why economic diplomacy must be closely connected with private-sector execution.

Q2:

Looking back across different administrations, what has been your most memorable experience in supporting Indonesia’s economic or commercial diplomacy?

The most memorable part of business diplomacy is often not the ceremony, but the process behind it. It is about explaining Indonesia’s direction to investors, translating investor concerns to policymakers, building trust, and ensuring that meetings lead to real follow-up.

For me, successful diplomacy is not measured by the number of MoUs signed. It is measured by whether investment is realized, barriers are resolved, and confidence is maintained.

Q3:

Based on your experience in conducting ‘business diplomacy’ overseas, what are the prevailing perceptions of Indonesia among international stakeholders? Have these perceptions evolved in recent years?

In my experience dealing with foreign partners, Indonesia is increasingly seen as a large, open, and strategic market. Our demographic strength, natural resources, political stability, and ability to host major global forums have improved international confidence.

But there are still concerns. The main issues are regulatory changes, bureaucratic complexity, and inconsistent implementation between institutions or regions.

So, the perception is positive, but not without caution. Indonesia is attractive, but investors still want greater predictability.

Q4:

In your opinion, what are Indonesia’s most critical assets and strategic resources in strengthening its foreign economic diplomacy?

Indonesia’s main assets are not only natural resources. They include a large domestic market, strategic geography, critical minerals, young talent, political stability, and openness to global partnership.

However, assets only become leverage when supported by clear regulations, infrastructure, skilled workers, and credible governance.

The down streaming agenda shows this clearly. In 2024, foreign direct investment reached around Rp900.2 trillion, supported by sectors such as mining, metals, and processing industries. The real task is to ensure these investments create technology transfer, skilled jobs, local supplier development, and stronger domestic industrial capacity.

Q5:

Which regions or markets do you believe Indonesia may have overemphasized, and which regions remain under-explored despite having strong relevance and potential for Indonesian businesses?

Indonesia has naturally focused on traditional partners such as China, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and the United States. These partners remain very important.

China is especially strategic. China has capital, technology, industrial scale, and demand, while Indonesia has resources, market size, and strategic geography. Both sides have unique bargaining positions.

But Indonesia should not only become a market for others. We must become a production base, a value-added hub, and a strategic partner.

• Europe — technology, sustainability, and high-quality investment.

• Africa — infrastructure, food, health, and consumer markets.

• India — scale, technology, and strategic complementarity.

• The Middle East — capital, energy, food security, logistics, and Islamic finance.

• BRICS-related economies — to be approached pragmatically, not ideologically.

Q6:

What areas do you believe are most important to improve in order to strengthen Indonesia’s engagement with international business and economic partners?

I think, the first priority is regulatory certainty. Investors can manage market risk, competition, and cost. What is harder to manage is uncertainty.

Indonesia needs to improve consistency of regulations, coordination between ministries, central regional policy alignment, licensing speed, investor aftercare, and early private-sector consultation.

Bureaucracy is not just an administrative issue. It directly shapes Indonesia’s investment reputation.

Q7:

What are the most effective instruments or platforms available today for Indonesian businesses to better leverage Indonesia’s foreign economic engagements?

G2G and B2B platforms have different strengths and must be used together. G2G helps open doors, set strategic direction, and build political confidence. B2B turns that direction into projects, partnerships, and investment.

Useful platforms include G20 business engagement, ASEAN Business Advisory Council, bilateral business councils, APINDO international relations platforms, sectoral business missions, and structured government-business dialogues.

The key is follow-up. Diplomacy must not stop at forums. It must become a delivery mechanism.

Q8:

Foreign Policy Talks has long advocated the idea that “foreign policy begins at home, and must also return home,” emphasizing the importance of strong domestic foundations to ensure international engagements deliver tangible benefits to society. What are your thoughts on this perspective?

I strongly agree. Foreign policy is only credible when domestic execution is strong. We can speak about investment, trade, supply chains, and industrial upgrading abroad, but everything is tested at home.

The practical questions are simple: can permits be processed predictably, are regulations consistent, is the workforce ready, can investors expand after entering Indonesia, and do local suppliers, SMEs, workers, and communities benefit?

For me, this principle is not only diplomatic. It is a national discipline.

Foreign policy must bring the world to Indonesia, but it must return home as factories, jobs, skills, stronger local suppliers, and greater national competitiveness. The real measure of diplomacy is not how many MoUs are signed, but whether Indonesia becomes stronger because of them.

---