Preference Is Not Trust

In 2026, 80.1% of Indonesian opinion-makers surveyed by ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute chose China over the United States when asked which country ASEAN should align with if it were forced to choose between the two.

For Chinese companies and institutions looking toward Indonesia, that sounds like very good news. And it is, but perhaps not in the way we might initially assume.

The change is striking. In 2020, only 35.8% of Indonesian respondents chose China in the same forced-choice question. By 2026, the figure had risen to 80.1%.

But relative preference is exactly what the question measures.

It does not tell us that 80.1% of respondents trust China, want closer alignment with China, or automatically regard Chinese organizations operating in Indonesia as trustworthy.

One reason for the shift becomes clearer when we look at the other side of the comparison. Trust in the United States among Indonesian respondents fell to a record-low 17.3% in 2026. China’s growing relative advantage may therefore reflect changing attitudes toward China, but it also reflects growing dissatisfaction with the alternative. That distinction matters in business.

Being preferred to your competitor is not the same as being trusted yourself.

A customer may choose your product because the alternative is more expensive. A partner may work with you because you offer better access to capital or technology. A government may welcome your investment because it advances domestic priorities.

All of these are genuine advantages. None automatically creates trust.

Indonesia adds another layer to the picture. The survey findings also show strong confidence in ASEAN, consistent with Indonesia’s longstanding bebas dan aktif tradition of strategic autonomy. The ISEAS analysis therefore cautions against interpreting increased preference for China as straightforward movement toward a China-centred regional order.

For Chinese organizations, this makes the opportunity more interesting, not less. A favourable environment can open the door. What happens afterward determines whether an organization earns local legitimacy.

Do local partners have meaningful influence? Does leadership communication work in the local context? Are commitments understood in the same way on both sides? Does the organization understand local stakeholders rather than assuming that positive attitudes toward China have already created common ground?

These are the questions through which market advantage becomes relational advantage. The first can come from price, technology, scale, access, geopolitical circumstances, or a competitor’s decline. The second has to be built.

The Indonesian data show a significant opening for engagement with China. The mistake would be assuming that the opening means the work of building trust has already been done.

Being chosen is an opportunity to earn trust, not evidence that you already have it.

Based on Melinda Martinus, “Indonesia’s Strategic Preferences amid Great-Power Competition: Insights from the State of Southeast Asia Survey,” ISEAS Perspective 2026/65, 10 September 2026. Read the ISEAS analysis⁠