President Prabowo Subianto's assertion that "villages don't use dollars" has sparked sharp rebuke from Indonesia's farmers and fishermen, who say the comment reveals a troubling disconnect between the administration's economic nationalism and the dollar-denominated reality of rural livelihoods.
The remark, made during discussions about Indonesia's currency policy and exchange rate volatility, suggested that dollar fluctuations primarily affect urban elites rather than ordinary Indonesians in rural areas. But farmers and fishing communities quickly pushed back, highlighting how global commodity markets reach deep into village economies.
Dollar Costs in Village Economies
"Our fertilizer prices are tied directly to global markets priced in dollars," explained farmers responding to the president's comments, as reported by ABC Indonesia. "When the rupiah weakens, our costs go up immediately, but we can't raise our prices because we're competing with imports."
Fishermen echoed similar concerns. Fuel for fishing boats, though purchased in rupiah at Indonesian ports, tracks global oil prices denominated in dollars. Spare parts for engines and equipment are often imported and priced in foreign currency. Even domestic suppliers adjust prices based on dollar-denominated international markets.
"The president says we don't use dollars, but tell that to the diesel supplier," one fishing community representative noted. "Every time the exchange rate moves, we feel it in our operating costs."
The backlash highlights a broader tension in Prabowo's economic policy approach. The president has emphasized economic nationalism, promoting rupiah usage and reducing dependence on foreign currency. But Indonesia's integration into global supply chains means even rural producers face exposure to international price fluctuations.
Urban-Rural Economic Divide
The incident reveals whose interests Indonesia's economic policy prioritizes. While urban consumers and businesses have mechanisms to hedge currency risk or benefit from imported goods, rural producers face cost increases without corresponding support systems.
Agriculture accounts for roughly 12 percent of Indonesia's GDP but employs more than 30 percent of the workforce, predominantly in rural areas. These workers have limited ability to absorb cost increases from currency depreciation, yet face direct exposure through input costs like fertilizer, fuel, and imported equipment.
"This isn't just about dollars," commented online observers of the controversy. "It's about whether economic policymakers understand the actual mechanisms by which rural Indonesians earn their living."
The comment also raises questions about Prabowo's economic policy team. Having assembled advisors focused on strategic industries and national champions, some analysts wonder whether the administration adequately represents agricultural and rural economic interests in policy formulation.
Political Implications
For Prabowo, who cultivated significant rural support during his presidential campaign, the misstep threatens to undermine his populist credentials. While urban voters may appreciate nationalist rhetoric about reducing dollar dependence, rural voters experiencing direct economic pain from currency volatility may question whether the president understands their challenges.
Indonesia's agricultural sector has faced mounting pressures from climate change, infrastructure deficits, and competition from subsidized imports. Currency volatility adds another layer of uncertainty to an already precarious situation for small-scale producers.
The episode also illustrates how economic nationalism can oversimplify complex realities. While reducing dollar dependence may be a worthy long-term goal, declaring that villages "don't use dollars" ignores how deeply integrated even rural Indonesia has become with global markets.
Farmers purchasing fertilizer, fishermen buying fuel, and smallholders selling commodities all operate within price structures ultimately denominated in dollars—even when transactions occur in rupiah. The global commodity system ensures that exchange rate movements ripple through to the most remote villages, affecting livelihoods in ways that nationalist rhetoric cannot wish away.
In Indonesia, as across archipelagic democracies, unity in diversity requires constant negotiation across islands, ethnicities, and beliefs. That negotiation now extends to economic policy, where Jakarta must balance nationalist aspirations with the material realities of how Indonesians—rural and urban—actually earn their livelihoods. President Prabowo's remark suggests that balance remains a work in progress.
