Russia and China often work from the same playbook. This is clear in their reactions to domestic protests in places of interest, including Indonesia.

Since late August, Indonesians have been protesting against police violence and politicians’ perks. Moscow and Beijing have taken advantage of this chaos, claiming it is a direct result of the United States meddling in the domestic affairs of an Asian nation. The Indonesian government and its diplomatic partners, as well as the public, should be aware of these operations. Moreover, governments and intelligence experts should forecast the next steps Russia-China collaboration to enable preventative measures.

It is not new for Russia and China to frame demonstrations as Western-engineered: they have done so in response to domestic protests in Moscow and Hong Kong. The two countries have also discredited democracy protests elsewhere—including in Ukraine, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Serbia and Thailand—using claims of covert US interference in domestic politics.

Commonly, adversaries rely on two main narratives. One is to accuse protesters of being paid by non-profit organisations with an aim to plunge countries into chaos and anarchy. Such organisations include the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the Open Society Foundation, founded by US billionaire George Soros. The other narrative is that protesters are instruments of the US Central Intelligence Agency to establish Western democracies through revolution, conveniently enabled by US-made software and digital tools.

These narratives begin with reports from state-backed news agencies, such as China’s Global Times and Russia’s Pravda and Sputnik. These news items are then pushed to social media platforms. Earlier this month, Sputnik quoted Hong Kong-based commentator Angelo Giuliano and Vietnam-based Nguyen Minh Tam as having suggested that Soros or the CIA were involved in Indonesian protests. Local media outlets, including Jakarta Daily and VOI, picked up the false narrative, although they provided warnings that the claim came from a Russian outlet.

In the next stage, influencers clearly aligned with China and Russia amplify the messaging. In Indonesia’s case, Hong Kong-based narrative-shaper NuryVittachi, who argues that the Tiananmen protests were orchestrated by the NED, shared a video alleging that Western forces were backing non-government organisations and media groups to create a violent uprising. His post was shared more than 500 times on X and received more than 70,000 views. In similar vein, pro-China account Kanthan2030 accused US of orchestrating ‘spontaneous grassroots protests’ and creating a cartoon skull mascot as a symbol of Indonesia’s revolution. In reality, the skull that has been emblematic of the protest movement is from One Piece, a Japanese anime.

On the pro-Russia side, Brian J Berletic, who is known for promoting Kremlin propaganda, accused Indonesia’s protesters of burning the country down and ‘killing each other’ because NED programs were funding student organisations across the country. A video he published on YouTube discussing conspiracies about democratic revolutions has reached almost 40,000 views. He has also suggested that Indonesia has been targeted because it joined the BRICS dialogue. The video received more than 7,000 views in less than 10 hours.

Indonesian pro-Russian propagandists yo2thok also reposted the reporting from Sputnik accusing Soros and NED of creating the protests. When Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto chose to attend the 3 September military parade in Beijing, the account posted a picture of Prabowo with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. The post, featuring the proverb ‘The dogs may bark, but the caravan moves on’, which is common in Indonesia, showed support for Prabowo’s decision.

Despite narrative similarity, Russia and China have different motives. For Russia, portraying Indonesia as a fellow victim of US interference strengthens its long-standing anti-Western propaganda, appealing to Cold War grievances and the US’s war on terror. Moscow further exploits gaps in Western credibility to justify annexation of Ukraine. China, however, seeks to differentiate itself from the US, presenting itself as a reliable development partner while painting Washington as a destabiliser. This image supports Beijing’s investments and projects in Indonesia, such as in nickel mining and solar panel firms.

The two countries do, however, share a common goal. The convergence of these narratives aims at herding Indonesia away from liberal-democratic forces and closer to the authoritarians’ orbit.

Prabowo has repeatedly used the narrative of foreign agents or foreign influence to respond to any public demonstrations. In April, he suggested that demonstrations may not have been entirely organic, and asked whether protesters were genuine or if they had been paid. Such statements, even when they are vague, open the door for Beijing and Moscow to simply amplify suspicions of foreign involvement without needing to invent them.

It’s likely that Russia and China, in their no-limits partnership, will continue to amplify narratives of Western plots to create unrest in Indonesia and across Southeast Asia. They will likely suggest that Western powers are fair-weather friends, while alternative powers such as Beijing and Moscow can provide a reliable partnership with no strings attached.

For Indonesia, attributing public protests to foreign influence could  delegitimise genuine grievances, silence critics and narrow the space for civic dialogue. Suharto’s authoritarian regime branded student and labour movements as tools of foreign powers to ‘disturb national stability.’ Prabowo would do well to avoid repeating this playbook. Otherwise, he risks undermining a democratic legacy painstakingly built over the past 25 years.