Optimasi Sinkronisasi Kebijakan Pertahanan dan Kebijakan Publik terhadap Perang Hibrida demi Kepentingan Nasional
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35335/lebah.v18i4.336Keywords:
Integrasi Kebijakan, Metode Campuran, Perang Hibrida, Peran Publik, Pertahanan IndonesiaAbstract
Ancaman perang hibrida yang bersifat dinamis dan multidimensi memadukan instrumen militer dan non-militer seperti disinformasi, perang siber, perang tarif, serta hegemoni negara kuat di berbagai kawasan menuntut integrasi kebijakan pertahanan dan publik secara sistemik dan adaptif di Indonesia. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menelaah pengaruh dimensi operasional non-militer terhadap persepsi publik mengenai kesiapan Indonesia dalam menghadapi hybrid warfare, serta merumuskan urgensi strategi sinkronisasi kebijakan guna memperkuat ketahanan nasional. Metode yang digunakan adalah mixed methods, dengan pendekatan kualitatif melalui wawancara dengan pakar dan analisis kebijakan, serta pendekatan kuantitatif menggunakan regresi linear untuk mengukur persepsi publik. Hasil kualitatif menunjukkan pentingnya sinergi lintas kelembagaan pemerintah, penguatan penguasaan teknologi digital, dan tata kelola informasi yang responsif. Temuan kuantitatif mendukung hasil tersebut, dengan nilai determinasi yang sangat tinggi (R² = 0,965), menunjukkan bahwa kesiapan nasional Indonesia sangat dipengaruhi oleh efektivitas koordinasi antarlembaga, ketahanan sosial, dan kapasitas pemerintah dalam mengelola disinformasi. Novelty dari penelitian ini terletak pada penggabungan tiga perspektif teoritis Asymmetric Conflict, Security Governance, dan Resilienceke dalam satu kerangka model integrasi kebijakan pertahanan dan publik dalam konteks menghadapi perang hibrida. Penelitian ini memberikan kontribusi terhadap pengembangan literatur mengenai perang hibrida di Indonesia dengan menawarkan model kebijakan berbasis pendekatan whole-of-government dan whole-of-society. Implikasinya, strategi pertahanan masa depan perlu memperkuat adaptasi kelembagaan dan partisipasi publik di seluruh wilayah Indonesia guna meningkatkan resiliensi terhadap ancaman hibrida yang terus berkembang dalam berbagai bentuk.
References
Alam, M. K. (2021). A systematic qualitative case study: questions, data collection, NVivo analysis and saturation. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 16(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1108/qrom-09-2019-1825
Anghel, V., & Džankić, J. (2023). Wartime EU: consequences of the Russia–Ukraine war on the enlargement process. Journal of European Integration, 45(3), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2023.2190106
Ansell, C., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2023). Public administration and politics meet turbulence: The search for robust governance responses. Public Administration, 101(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12874
Chawla, S., Sareen, P., Gupta, S., Joshi, M., & Bajaj, R. (2023). Technology enabled communication during COVID 19: analysis of tweets from top ten Indian IT companies using NVIVO. International Journal of Information Technology, 15(4), 2063–2075. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41870-023-01242-6
Christou, P. A. (2024). Thematic analysis through artificial intelligence (AI). Qualitative Report, 29(2). https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2024.7046
Dąbrowska, J., Almpanopoulou, A., Brem, A., Chesbrough, H., Cucino, V., Di Minin, A., Giones, F., Hakala, H., Marullo, C., & Mention, A. (2022). Digital transformation, for better or worse: a critical multi‐level research agenda. R&D Management, 52(5), 930–954. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12531
Dhakal, K. (2022). NVivo. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 110(2), 270. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2022.1271
Dov Bachmann, S., Putter, D., & Duczynski, G. (2023). Hybrid warfare and disinformation: A Ukraine war perspective. Global Policy, 14(5), 858–869. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13257
Dragomir, E. (2023). Asymmetric cold war trade: Romania and the generalized system of preferences (1968–1979). Europe-Asia Studies, 75(7), 1069–1093. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2023.2185204
Fergie, D. (2019). Geopolitics turned inwards: The Princeton Military Studies Group and the national security imagination. Diplomatic History, 43(4), 644–670. https://doi.org/10.1093/dh/dhz026
Florea, A., & Malejacq, R. (2024). The supply and demand of rebel governance. International Studies Review, 26(1), viae004. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viae004
Genschel, P. (2022). Bellicist integration? The war in Ukraine, the European Union and core state powers. Journal of European Public Policy, 29(12), 1885–1900. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2022.2141823
Goyal, M., & Deshwal, P. (2023). Online post-purchase customer experience: a qualitative study using NVivo software. Quality & Quantity, 57(4), 3763–3781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01492-9
Gunneriusson, H. (2021). Hybrid warfare & theory. Icono14, 19(1), 15–37. https://doi.org/10.7195/ri14.v19i1.1608
J. J.Driedger. (2021). Bilateral defence and security cooperation despite disintegration: Does the Brexit process divide the United Kingdom and Germany on Russia? European Journal of International Security, 6(1), 86–108. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2020.18
Johansen, J., & Martin, B. (2019). Social defence. Nössemark, Norway: Irene Publishing.
Joshi, Y. (2023). Beyond binaries. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 45(2), 282–312. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs45-2f
Khan, S. R. (2022). Dataset and Codebook for Jamovi Tutorials. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives and Scholarship, 8(1), 28.
Kraiwanit, T., Limna, P., & Siripipatthanakul, S. (2023). NVivo for social sciences and management studies: A systematic review. Advance Knowledge for Executives, 2(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.25147/ijcsr.2017.001.1.106
Krishnan, A. (2022). Fifth Generation Warfare, Hybrid Warfare, and Gray Zone Conflict. Journal of Strategic Security, 15(4), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.15.4.2013
Kurniawan et al. (2021). Economic growth – environment nexus: An analysis based on natural capital component of inclusive wealth. Ecological Indicators, 120. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106982
Libiseller, C. (2023). ‘Hybrid warfare’as an academic fashion. Journal of Strategic Studies, 46(4), 858–880. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2023.2177987
Ljungkvist, K. (2024). The military-strategic rationality of hybrid warfare: Everyday total defence under strategic non-peace in the case of Sweden. European Journal of International Security, 9(4), 533–552. https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2024.18
Malatji, M., Marnewick, A. L., & Von Solms, S. (2022). Cybersecurity capabilities for critical infrastructure resilience. Information & Computer Security, 30(2), 255–279. https://doi.org/10.1108/ics-06-2021-0091
Manwaring, R., & Holloway, J. (2023). Resilience to cyber-enabled foreign interference: Citizen understanding and threat perceptions. Defence Studies, 23(2), 334–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2138349
Mara, D., Nate, S., Stavytskyy, A., & Kharlamova, G. (2022). The Place of Energy Security in the National Security Framework: An Assessment Approach. In Energies (Vol. 15, Issue 2). https://doi.org/10.3390/en15020658
Mattingsdal, J., Espevik, R., Johnsen, B. H., & Hystad, S. (2024). Exploring why police and military commanders do what they do: An empirical analysis of decision-making in hybrid warfare. Armed Forces & Society, 50(4), 1218–1244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x231160711
Mitchell-Jones, J. K., Yik, B. J., Machost, H., & Stains, M. (2025). Aligning graduate chemistry training with diverse career paths: insights from student perceptions of valued skills. Chemistry Education Research and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1039/d4rp00317a
Monaghan, S. (2019). Countering hybrid warfare. Prism, 8(2), 82–99. https://doi.org/10.11610/isij.3925
Mumford, A., & Carlucci, P. (2023). Hybrid warfare: The continuation of ambiguity by other means. European Journal of International Security, 8(2), 192–206. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1017/eis.2022.19https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2022.19
Neyazi, T. A., Yi Kai Ng, A., Kuru, O., & Muhtadi, B. (2022). Who gets exposed to political misinformation in a hybrid media environment? The case of the 2019 Indonesian Election. Social Media+ Society, 8(3), 20563051221122790. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221122792
Pilcher, N., & Cortazzi, M. (2024). ’Qualitative’and’quantitative’methods and approaches across subject fields: implications for research values, assumptions, and practices. Quality & Quantity, 58(3), 2357–2387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-023-01734-4
Rogozhina, N. G. (2021). The countries of southeast asia and the chinese initiative belt and road: a model of interaction. World Economy and International Relations, 65(10), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-10-91-102
Soares, J. (2021). A Literature Review on Comprehensive National Defence Systems. Conceptual Framework for Comprehensive National Defence System: Interim Report of the SAS-152 Study: Review of Literature, Case Studies and Preliminary Findings, 7–62.
South, L., Saffo, D., Vitek, O., Dunne, C., & Borkin, M. A. (2022). Effective use of Likert scales in visualization evaluations: A systematic review. Computer Graphics Forum, 41(3), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.14521
Stromseth, J. R. (2021). Rivalry and response: Assessing great power dynamics in Southeast Asia. Brookings Institution Press.
Sun, L., et al. (2023). Fighting false information from propagation process: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(10), 1–38. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/3563388
Tanujaya, B., Prahmana, R. C. I., & Mumu, J. (2022). Likert scale in social sciences research: Problems and difficulties. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 16(4), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.51709/19951272/winter2022/7
Tripodi, C. (2025). Fragmented frontiers: three approaches to understanding irregular warfare. Small Wars and Insurgencies, 00(00), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09592318.2025.2468941
Tritto, A. (2021). China’s Belt and Road Initiative: from perceptions to realities in Indonesia’s coal power sector. Energy Strategy Reviews, 34, 100624. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2021.100624
Tütüncü, Ö. (2023). Open source softwares and Jamovi statistical software. https://doi.org/10.17123/atad.1404447
Ucko, D. H., & Marks, T. (2020). Crafting Strategy for Irregular Warfare:. National Defense University Press.
Ullah, A., & Xinlei, L. (2025). Great Power Divergence: Military Primacy Versus Economic Engagement in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Theoretical Reexamination of Realist Paradigms. Chinese Political Science Review, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-025-00287-1
Vogel, R., Göbel, M., Grewe‐Salfeld, M., Herbert, B., Matsuo, Y., & Weber, C. (2022). Cross‐sector partnerships: Mapping the field and advancing an institutional approach. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24(3), 394–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12283
Walker, R. V, Moraine, A. A., Black, K. J., Oberkirch, C., & Cavanaugh, M. C. (2024). Running and Interpreting Multiple Regression in Jamovi. Exploring Diversity with Statistics Using Jamovi: Step-by-Step Guides. https://doi.org/10.29057/mjmr.v12i23.10664
Wall, D. S. (2024). Cybercrime: The transformation of crime in the information age. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4707509
Wigell, M. (2019). Hybrid interference as a wedge strategy: a theory of external interference in liberal democracy. International Affairs, 95(2), 255–275. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiz018
Wijnja, K. (2022). Countering hybrid threats: does strategic culture matter? Defence Studies, 22(1), 16–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2021.1945452
Zhang, C., & Zhou, T. (2023). Russia’s strategic communication during the Ukraine crisis (2013–2014): Victims, hypocrites, and radicals. Discourse & Communication, 17(6), 784–810. https://doi.org/10.1177/17504813231173118
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Cecilia Harsono, Adang Supriyadi, Faonaso Harefa, Ignatius Joko Purwanto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
