Socio Today
Jakarta, VIVA – On Tuesday, October 21, 2025, prominent political observer Agung Baskoro delivered a critical assessment of President Prabowo Subianto’s nascent administration, asserting that its leadership style remains overly centered on a single figure. Baskoro argued that this "Prabowo-centric" approach, which he metaphorically termed "Superman management," significantly curtails the effectiveness of key government officials, including the Vice President, coordinating ministers, and other cabinet members. Speaking on tvOne’s "Apa Kabar Indonesia Malam," Baskoro urged a fundamental shift towards a "super team" model to enable the cabinet to more effectively address the nation’s complex challenges.
Contextualizing the Critique: The Early Days of the Prabowo-Gibran Era
President Prabowo Subianto’s administration, inaugurated in late 2024 following a hard-fought presidential election, entered office with a broad mandate and high public expectations. The formation of his cabinet, a blend of experienced technocrats, political allies, and new faces, was closely watched. Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka, a youthful figure with a distinct political background, assumed a role often seen as pivotal in the Indonesian political landscape. Coordinating Ministers, strategically positioned above several related ministries, are designed to streamline policy implementation, resolve inter-ministerial conflicts, and ensure a cohesive governmental strategy across critical sectors such as economics, human development, and political affairs.
Baskoro’s observations come roughly a year into the administration’s tenure, a period typically characterized by the consolidation of power, the rollout of flagship programs, and the establishment of a distinctive governance style. The transition from a campaign platform to actual policy execution often reveals the strengths and weaknesses of a new government’s operational framework. The "Superman management" analogy points to a perception where the President is seen as the primary, if not sole, driver of problem-solving and decision-making, potentially overshadowing the roles and responsibilities of his appointed officials. This dynamic, if persistent, could lead to a concentration of authority and a potential bottleneck in governmental responsiveness.
The "Superman" Syndrome: A Deep Dive into Centralized Leadership
Agung Baskoro articulated his concerns by contrasting a "Prabowo-sentris" (Prabowo-centric) approach with the desired "super team" model. "I think the first issue is about this ‘Superman management’ – from a Prabowo-centric approach to a super team," Baskoro stated. "How can the cabinet manage many problems and respond to them well?" This critique suggests that the current operational mode places an excessive burden on the President, who is perceived as frequently intervening to resolve issues that, under a more distributed leadership model, would fall within the purview of his Vice President or relevant ministers.
Such a centralized style, while potentially ensuring swift decision-making in specific instances or reflecting a leader’s desire for direct oversight, carries inherent risks. It can inadvertently stifle initiative among cabinet members, lead to a reliance on the President for even routine matters, and create a bottleneck in the policy implementation pipeline. Furthermore, it might convey an impression that the President lacks full confidence in his team’s ability to handle challenges independently, or that the hierarchical structure discourages proactive problem-solving from below. In a nation as diverse and complex as Indonesia, with myriad regional and sectoral issues, effective governance necessitates robust delegation and empowered leadership at all levels.
The Vice President’s Perceived Role: "Between There and Not There"
A central point of Baskoro’s critique focused on the perceived marginalization of Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka. "How do you want to optimize the Vice President? The Vice President looks like he’s ‘between there and not there’," Baskoro elaborated. The role of the Vice President in Indonesia, as outlined in the constitution, is to assist the President, represent the nation, and assume the presidency in case of vacancy. Historically, the extent of a Vice President’s influence has varied greatly, often depending on their relationship with the President and their delegated responsibilities. Some VPs have been highly visible, leading specific task forces or policy initiatives, while others have maintained a lower profile.
Baskoro’s assessment suggests that Gibran’s role has, so far, leaned towards the latter. If the Vice President is perceived as having limited substantive engagement in major policy decisions or crisis management, it raises questions about the overall distribution of executive power and the optimal utilization of the nation’s leadership resources. A Vice President who is "between there and not there" could signify missed opportunities for policy advocacy, diplomatic engagement, and providing an additional layer of leadership perspective. This perception can also affect public confidence in the coherence and depth of the administration’s leadership structure, potentially leading to questions about the strategic deployment of the Vice President’s mandate and capabilities.
Coordinating Ministers and Ministerial Efficacy: Beyond Symbolism
The observer extended his criticism to the coordinating ministers, whose positions he described as "symbolic," lacking substantive impact in resolving governmental issues. Indonesia’s system of coordinating ministries (Menko) is designed to ensure cross-sectoral synergy and prevent policy silos. For example, the Coordinating Minister for Economic Affairs is responsible for aligning policies across ministries such as Finance, Trade, Industry, and Agriculture. If these critical roles are reduced to mere symbolism, the potential for fragmented policy, inter-ministerial disputes, and inefficient resource allocation significantly increases.
Baskoro warned, "Because often we see that it is Pak Prabowo who extinguishes the problems. And for me, this cannot be continued because it will make, forgive me, the Vice President, the Coordinating Ministers, and other ministers useless if this kind of pattern continues." This statement underscores a significant concern: if the President consistently acts as the ultimate problem-solver, it disincentivizes proactive leadership and accountability within individual ministries. Ministers might become hesitant to take bold initiatives or resolve complex issues independently, knowing that the President may ultimately step in. This could lead to a stagnation of innovative policy, a slowdown in bureaucratic processes, and a general sense of disempowerment across the cabinet, ultimately affecting the administration’s ability to deliver on its promises to the public.
Challenges in Public Communication: The Quest for One Voice
Beyond leadership structure, Agung Baskoro highlighted the crucial need for improved public communication from the government. While acknowledging some progress through institutions like the Presidential Staff Office (KSP), the Communication Bureau (Bakom), and the Public Information Agency (BKP), he stressed the imperative for clearer communication guidelines. According to Baskoro, a lack of consistent messaging results in officials frequently making "slip of tongue" errors or delivering "acak kadut" (messy, disorganized) statements.
"So that there are no frequent slips of tongue, so that the communication is not chaotic," he urged. Inconsistent public communication can have profound consequences. It can sow confusion among the populace regarding government policies, erode public trust, and create an impression of disunity within the administration. For international stakeholders, including investors and diplomatic partners, ambiguous or contradictory statements can signal policy uncertainty, potentially deterring foreign investment and undermining Indonesia’s standing on the global stage. Effective government communication requires a unified narrative, clear spokespersons, and a well-coordinated strategy to ensure that policies and initiatives are understood, supported, and accurately represented to both domestic and international audiences. The challenge lies in harmonizing the diverse voices within a large government apparatus into a single, authoritative message.
Economic Headwinds and Policy Implementation: Ensuring Programs Reach the Grassroots
Baskoro also identified the economy as a significant challenge for the administration, particularly the imperative of ensuring that large-scale government programs genuinely benefit all layers of society. He pointed to persistent economic contraction as a clear indicator that the President’s economic team requires greater focus and solidarity. This assessment suggests that despite government efforts, the broader economic situation in 2025 remains precarious, with the benefits of growth not adequately trickling down to the populace.
"The two stimulus packages provided by the government during this year prove that the President’s economic team must be truly concerned and, again, must not depend on the ‘Purbaya Effect’," Baskoro stated. The reference to "Purbaya Effect" likely alludes to an over-reliance on a particular economic strategy or the influence of a specific economic advisor (e.g., Senior Deputy Governor of Bank Indonesia, Destry Damayanti, or economist Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa, known for their roles in monetary or fiscal policy). Baskoro’s comment implies a need for a more diversified, robust, and perhaps less dogmatic approach to economic policy, rather than depending on the insights or influence of a single individual or school of thought.
The fact that two stimulus packages were deployed within a year suggests that earlier interventions might not have achieved their intended impact, or that the economic challenges are more entrenched than initially perceived. Stimulus measures typically involve government spending, tax cuts, or monetary easing designed to boost economic activity during downturns. Their repeated application signals ongoing economic vulnerabilities and underscores the urgency for effective, targeted interventions. Ensuring that these programs reach the grassroots level means overcoming bureaucratic hurdles, preventing leakage, and accurately identifying and addressing the needs of vulnerable populations and struggling sectors. Without this, large-scale initiatives risk becoming ineffective, failing to stimulate demand or alleviate hardship where it is most needed.
Call for a "Super Team": Recommendations for Governance Reform
Agung Baskoro’s overarching recommendation is a decisive shift from "Superman management" to a "super team" model. This paradigm shift would necessitate a re-evaluation of how authority is delegated, how coordination mechanisms function, and how individual cabinet members are empowered to lead. In a "super team" approach, the President would act as a visionary leader and orchestrator, setting broad strategic directions and providing overarching guidance, while empowering the Vice President, coordinating ministers, and individual ministers to take ownership of their respective portfolios.
Such a model would foster greater collaboration, encourage innovation, and enhance the government’s capacity to respond to a multitude of issues concurrently. It would involve strengthening inter-ministerial coordination through more frequent and substantive meetings, clearly defined roles and responsibilities, and robust accountability frameworks. For the Vice President, this could mean assigning specific, high-profile portfolios or task forces that leverage their unique skills and political capital. For coordinating ministers, it would involve granting them greater authority to resolve disputes and drive cross-sectoral policy integration, moving beyond a purely symbolic function. Ultimately, a "super team" implies a collective leadership that is greater than the sum of its individual parts, capable of tackling complex national issues with agility and depth.
Potential Implications for Trust and Governance
The implications of the current governance style, as identified by Baskoro, are far-reaching. A perceived over-centralization of power, coupled with disempowered ministers and inconsistent communication, could gradually erode public trust in the administration’s ability to govern effectively. Public confidence is a crucial asset for any government, influencing compliance with policies, willingness to participate in national initiatives, and overall social cohesion. If citizens perceive that decisions are made by a single figure without broad cabinet input, or that official statements are unreliable, it can foster cynicism and detachment.
Moreover, international perceptions are equally important. Global investors, multilateral organizations, and diplomatic partners observe a country’s governance quality closely. An administration perceived as lacking a cohesive, empowered team or struggling with internal communication might raise concerns about policy predictability, stability, and the overall investment climate. In an increasingly interconnected world, good governance and a strong, unified leadership team are vital for attracting foreign direct investment, securing international cooperation, and maintaining a positive global image. The current critique serves as a timely reminder for the Prabowo administration to proactively address these structural and communicative challenges to ensure long-term stability and effectiveness.
Government’s Stance and Future Outlook
While the original article does not provide a direct response from the Prabowo administration, governments typically react to such criticisms by reaffirming their commitment to good governance, emphasizing ongoing evaluations of performance, and highlighting the complexity of national challenges. Presidential spokespersons might stress the administration’s dedication to teamwork, efficiency, and ensuring that all cabinet members contribute meaningfully to national development. They might also point to initial successes or ongoing reforms aimed at strengthening coordination and communication.
The observations made by Agung Baskoro present a critical juncture for the Prabowo-Gibran administration. As it moves beyond its initial year, the opportunity exists to recalibrate its governance strategy, fostering a more inclusive and delegated leadership model. The successful implementation of its ambitious agenda, from economic recovery to social welfare programs, will heavily depend on its ability to transform from a perceived "Superman management" into a truly collaborative and effective "super team," capable of harnessing the full potential of its diverse cabinet for the benefit of all Indonesians. The coming months will be crucial in determining whether these critical assessments lead to tangible reforms and a more distributed, robust approach to national leadership.
