In Jakarta this week, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto formalised the Australia-Indonesia Treaty on Common Security, a diplomatic milestone that both leaders say reflects an unprecedented closeness between the neighbouring nations and strengthens their commitment to regional peace and stability.

Albanese described the agreement as a significant extension of nearly three decades of bilateral security cooperation, underscoring shared interests in addressing evolving challenges in the Indo-Pacific region.

The treaty commits both governments to regular consultations at leadership and ministerial levels on matters affecting their common security and to pursue cooperative activities designed to benefit their own security and that of the wider region.

Despite the celebratory framing by government officials, including Foreign Minister Penny Wong’s assertion that the pact marks the strongest bilateral security relationship in decades, independent analysts caution against interpreting the treaty as a full-blown defence alliance.

The agreement does not impose obligations to treat threats faced by one party as shared or to automatically commit to joint military responses, reflecting Indonesia’s longstanding policy of non-alignment and respect for sovereignty.

Jakarta’s foreign minister reiterated that the treaty is not a military pact or formal defence alliance but a structured consultative framework to discuss security issues and coordinate responses in accordance with each country’s own policies and legal frameworks.


Policy experts emphasise that the pact’s emphasis on consultation and political commitment, rather than enforceable defence commitments, underpins its “placebo” risk — the possibility that the treaty’s symbolic value may be mistaken for substantive security guarantees.

Observers note similarities with the 1995 Agreement on Maintaining Security, which Indonesia later abrogated following divergent strategic interests.

Although this new treaty builds on the 2006 Lombok Treaty and more recent Defence Cooperation Agreements, critics argue that its language stops short of compelling either signatory to act militarily on behalf of the other, placing it below Australia’s formal alliances such as the Australia-United States security relationship and its mutual defence pact with Papua New Guinea.


Proponents of the treaty counter that even without explicit mutual defence obligations, institutionalising regular high-level dialogue and cooperation on defence education, training and joint activities enhances mutual understanding and could yield practical benefits over time.

They argue that the pact’s strategic importance lies in reinforcing trust, fostering interoperability and creating mechanisms to address shared concerns, especially amid broader regional tensions and the shifting geopolitical landscape.

Nonetheless, the effectiveness of such consultative mechanisms will depend on how both nations operationalise the treaty in future crises and whether political will translates into substantive action beyond rhetoric.

The evolving partnership now faces scrutiny from regional observers watching how Canberra and Jakarta balance symbolic diplomacy with concrete security outcomes.