Repositioning Defense Research and Development as a Strategic Nexus: A Defense Innovation System Framework for Redesigning Indonesia’s Defense Architecture Toward Strategic Autonomy

Aris  Haryanto; Jupriyanto; George Royke  Deksino; Nurrudin  Ahmad; Nurul  Ilmi

doi:10.55927/ijar.v5i6.16639

Authors

Aris Haryanto Defence Industry Program, Faculty of Defence Engineering and Technology, Indonesia Defence University
Jupriyanto Defence Industry Program, Faculty of Defence Engineering and Technology, Indonesia Defence University
George Royke Deksino Defence Industry Program, Faculty of Defence Engineering and Technology, Indonesia Defence University
Nurrudin Ahmad Defence Industry Program, Faculty of Defence Engineering and Technology, Indonesia Defence University
Nurul Ilmi Defence Industry Program, Faculty of Defence Engineering and Technology, Indonesia Defence University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55927/ijar.v5i6.16639

Keywords:

Defense Innovation System, Strategic Nexus, Defense Governance, Strategic Autonomy, RnD Integration

Abstract

Indonesia’s defense sector faces persistent structural challenges that hinder strategic autonomy, such as weak inter-agency coordination, reliance on imported defense technologies, institutional fragmentation, and limited integration of RnD into defense planning. Using qualitative methods including systematic literature review, policy analysis, and comparative case studies of DARPA (United States) and ADD (South Korea), this study examines how repositioning defense RnD institutions as strategic coordinators can address the defense innovation “valley of death.” Through the Defense Innovation System and Strategic Nexus perspectives, the findings indicate that RnD-centered governance enhances defense self-reliance, technological adaptation, and long-term resilience. This study presents five policy recommendations focused on innovation funding, institutional reform, technology transfer, performance evaluation redesign, and personnel exchange.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bitzinger, R. A. (2013). Revisiting Armaments Production in Southeast Asia : New Dreams, Same Challenges. 35(3), 369–395. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs35-3c

Bitzinger, R. A. (2015). Defense Industries in Asia and the Technonationalist Impulse. 36(3), 453–472.

Bonvillian, W. B., & Atta, R. Van. (2011). ARPA-E and DARPA : Applying the DARPA model to energy innovation. 469–513.

Bonvillian, W. B., Atta, R. Van, & Windham, P. (2019). The DARPA Model for Transformative Technologies. In The DARPA Model for Transformative Technologies (p. 452). OpenBook Publishers.

Born, H., & Schnabel, A. (2009). Security Sector Reform in Challenging Environments (1st ed.). The Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF).

Caverley, J., & Kapstein, E. (2012). AMERICA AND THE ARMS TRADE: From Subsidies to Rent Extraction. 34.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design Choosing Among Five Approaches (H. Salmon (ed.); 4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Green, K., Hull, R., McMeekin, A., & Walsh, V. (1999). The construction of the techno-economic : networks vs paradigms. 777–792.

Harefa, F., Eko, I., Purwanto, D., Irwanto, B., & Asep, A. (2025). The Urgency of Indonesia’s National Security Act : Addressing Fragmentation in Security Sector Regulation. 6(1), 148–163.

Hartley, K. (2017). The Economics of Arms (1st ed.). Agenda Publishing.

Kemenhan RI. (2015). Buku Putih Pertahanan Indonesia 2015 (3rd ed.). Kementerian Pertahanan Republik Indonesia.

Matthews, R., Maharani, C., & Wu, S. S. (2025). Indonesia’s defense acquisition strategy. Asian Security, 21(2), 125–148.

Meijer, H., Brooks, S. G., Meijer, H., Brooks, S. G., Why, A., Cannot, E., Security, I., Authorization, H. A. L., Meijer, H., & Brooks, S. G. (2021). Illusions of Autonomy : Why Europe Cannot Provide for Its Security if the United States Pulls Back. To cite this version : HAL Id : hal-03393477.

Merindol, V., & Versailles, D. W. (2020). THE ( R ) EVOLUTION OF DEFENCE INNOVATION MODELS : Rationales and Consequences. July.

Min, I. J. (2026). Building indigenous defence industries in technologically third-tier countries : the cases of South Korea, Israel, and Poland. Ik Joon Min A thesis submitted for the degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews. Full metadata for this item is available in St Andrews Research Repository at : Identifier to use to cite or link to this thesis : DOI : https://doi.org/10.17630/sta/1507. This item is protected by original copyright.

Ostrom, E. (2003). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (14th ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Page, M. J., Mckenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-wilson, E., Mcdonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement : an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Reppy, J. (2000). The Place of the Defense Industry in National Systems of Innovation (Issue April). Cornell University.

Silva, L., & Sipri, L. (2024). TRENDS IN WORLD MILITARY EXPENDITURE, 2023. April, 1–12.

Steindl, U. M. (2024). Geopolitical Instability and Escalating Conflicts : The Impact on East Asian Defence Innovation Systems. 15(2023), 159–186.

Thelen, K., States, U., & America, L. (2010). Explaining Institutional Change.

Van Atta, R., Deitchman, S. J., & Reed, S. G. (1991). DARPA Technical Accomplishments Volume III: An Overall Perspective and Assessment of the Technical Accomplishments of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency: 1958-1990 (3rd ed.). Institute for Defense Analyses.