Politik Hukum Indonesia dalam Menghadapi Retaliasi Perang Dagang China terhadap Amerika Serikat Berdasarkan Prinsip Proteksionisme: Indonesia's Legal Policy in Responding to China's Trade War Retaliation Against the United States Based on the Principle of Protectionism

Tuti Rastuti; Andian Achya Dzikriyyah Khoirudin

doi:10.23969/litigasi.v26i1.15157

Authors

Tuti Rastuti Faculty of Law, Universitas Pasundan
Andian Achya Dzikriyyah Khoirudin Faculty of Law, Universitas Pasundan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v26i1.15157

Keywords:

International Trade, Protection, Retiliation, Economic

Abstract

The trade war between the United States and China, driven by protectionist policies, has significantly disrupted global trade flows. For Indonesia, the conflict impacts exports, imports, and investment, while raising three critical: protecting domestic industries, maintaining neutral trade relations, and adhering to the principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Indonesia must formulate a balanced legal and trade strategy that upholds both national interests and international obligations. This study analyzes Indonesia’s legal-political response to China’s trade war retaliation against the United States, emphasizing the application of protectionist principles within the WTO framework. Employing normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches, the study draws on WTO agreements, national trade laws, and relevant case studies. The research findings indicate that Indonesia is able to maintain economic stability and promote peaceful relations with both conflicting countries through trade cooperation, while remaining compliant with the principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The "free and active" foreign policy is implemented as a form of “strategic hedging” or “pragmatic engagement” in Indonesia’s international trade policy. This concept serves to mitigate the risks associated with global trade war retaliation. Such a trade policy is in line with Indonesia’s foreign policy as mandated by the Constitution.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adijaya, P. R. (2025). Perang Dagang Jilid 2, Apa Yang Indonesia Harus Lakukan? . https://ww.theindonesianinstitute.com/perang-dagang-jilid-2-apa-yang-indonesia-harus-lakukan/

Arie, T. M. V. (2025, March 26). Investor Asing Masih Menjauh, Apa Yang Salah Dengan di Pasar Saham. Kompas. https://money.kompas.com/read/2025/03/26/200654226/investor-asing-masih-menjauh-apa-yang-salah-di-pasar-saham

Arisanto, P. T., & Adi Wibawa. (2021). PERANG DAGANG ERA DONALD TRUMP SEBAGAI KEBIJAKAN LUAR NEGERI ADAPTIF CONVULSIVE AMERIKA SERIKAT. Indonesian Journal of International Relations, 5(2), 163–183. https://doi.org/10.32787/ijir.v5i2.222

Bariah, I., Anam, N., Mubarok, A. G., & Rohman, S. F. (2020). Strategi Kebijakan Moneter Indonesia dalam Menghadapi Dampak Perang Dagang AS-China. Jurnal Humaniora, 4(2), 155–167. http://jurnal.abulyatama.ac.id/humaniora

Benuf, K., & Azhar, M. (2020). Penelitian Hukum Sebagai Instrumen Mengurai Permasalahan Hukum Kontemporer. Jurnal Gema Keadilan, 7(1), 20–33.

Bown, C. P., & Hillman, J. A. (2019). WTO’ing a Resolution to the China Subsidy Problem. Journal of International Economic Law, 22(4), 557–578. https://doi.org/10.1093/JIEL/JGZ035

Carney, R. W., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., & Wang, H. (Helen). (2024). Geopolitical Risk And The Cost Of Capital In Emerging Economies. Emerging Markets Review, 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2024.101149

Carvalho, M., Azevedo, A., & Massuquetti, A. (2019). Emerging Countries And The Effects Of The Trade War Between US And China. Economies, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/economies7020045

CNBC Indonesia. (2025, February 11). Analisis Penyebab IHSG Ambruk Dalam Tiga Pekan . https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/market/20250211111251-17-609678/analisis-penyebab-ihsg-ambruk-10-dalam-tiga-pekan?utm_core

Dora, G. El. (2025, April 11). China Balas Tarif AS Jadi 125%, Picu Perang Dagang Jilid II. Investor Id. https://investor.id/international/394463/china-balas-tarifas-jadi-125-picu-perang-dagang-jilid-ii

Estetika, M., & Lestari Elake, G. (2022). Analisis Dinamika Perdagangan Internasional Dan Pengaruhnya Terhadap Kebijakan Perdagangan Proteksionisme Amerika Serikat. Sriwijaya Journal of Internasional Relations, 2(2), 42–69. https://garuda.kemdikbud.go.id/documents/detail/3262954

Fathun, M. (2017). PROTEKSIONISME SENGKETA DAGANG DALAM PERDAGANGAN INTERNASIONAL: PENDEKATAN NEGOSIASI STUDI KASUS: PROTEKSIONISME AS TERHADAP IMPOR DAGING KANADA. Jurnal Asia Pacific Studies, 1(1), 15–27.

Fikri, M. (2025, March 24). Data Transaksi Investor Asing Di Pasar Saham Indonesia. Data Indonesia . https://dataindonesia.id/pasar-saham/detail/data-transaksi-investor-asing-di-pasr-saham-indonesia-sepanjang-2025-berjalan-hingga-21-maret?utm_source

Fitriyanti, R., Judistia, A., Ulvatmi, J., Hanun, R., Nurhaliza, S., Uin, F., & Jakarta, S. H. (2023). DAMPAK PROTEKSIONISME AMERIKA SERIKAT TERHADAP INDONESIA DALAM PERSPEKTIF KONSTRUKTIVISME. Emerald: Journal of Economics and Social Sciences, 2(1), 37–46.

Guardian Jurnalism. (2025, April 16). Trump Tariff Will Send Global Trade Into Reverse The Year, Warn WTO. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/trump-tariffs/2025/apr/16/all

Hardenta, A. D., Ariefti, S. D., & Abyapta, W. R. (2023). Pengaruh Implementasi Kebijakan Proteksionisme Melalui Tingkat Komponen Dalam Negeri Terhadap Tender/Seleksi Internasional. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 30(1), 114–137. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol30.iss1.art6

Kartika, M. M. (2013). PROTEKSIONISME AMERIKA SERIKAT PASCA KRISIS FINANSIAL 2008. Jurnal Analisis Hubungan Internasional, 2(3), 357–381.

Kuenzel, D. J., & Sharma, R. R. (2021). Preferential trade agreements and MFN tariffs: Global evidence. European Economic Review, 138, 103850. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EUROECOREV.2021.103850

Lee, Y. S. (2019). Are Retaliatory Trade Measures Justified under the WTO Agreement on Safeguards? Journal of International Economic Law, 22(3), 439–458. https://doi.org/10.1093/JIEL/JGZ006

McDaniels, D., Molina, A. C., & Wijkström, E. N. (2018). A Closer Look At WTO’s Third Pillar: How WTO Committees Influence Regional Trade Agreements. Journal of International Economic Law, 21(4), 815–843. https://doi.org/10.1093/JIEL/JGY038

Mitchell, M. (2023). Analyzing the law qualitatively. Qualitative Research Journal, 23(1), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-04-2022-0061/FULL/PDF

Narayan, P. K., Rath, B. N., & Syarifuddin, F. (2022). Understanding the role of trade agreements in Indonesia’s FDI. Journal of Asian Economics, 82, 101532. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ASIECO.2022.101532

Pham, H. (2023). Trade reform, oligopsony, and labor market distortion: Theory and evidence. Journal of International Economics, 144, 103787. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JINTECO.2023.103787

Pujayanti, A. (2018). PERANG DAGANG AMERIKA SERIKAT-CHINA DAN IMPLIKASINYA BAGI INDONESIA. Bidang Hubungan Internasional: Info Singkat, 10(07), 7–12.

Qin, J. Y. (2019). Forced Technology Transfer and the US–China Trade War: Implications for International Economic Law. Journal of International Economic Law, 22(4), 743–762. https://doi.org/10.1093/JIEL/JGZ037

Saggi, K. (2004). Tariffs and the most favored nation clause. Journal of International Economics, 63(2), 341–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1996(03)00057-6

Saifulloh, M. R. (2020). Kebijakan Proteksionisme Indonesia Guna Menstabilkan Iklim Investasi Nasional dan Mengkapitalisasi Kondisi Perang Dagang Amerika Serikat-Tiongkok. Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis, 1(1), 51–63.

Sanchez Badin, M. R. (2011). Developmental Responses to the International Trade Legal Game - Examples of Intellectual Property and Export Credit Law Reforms in Brazil. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2207891

Saputro, D., & Evandio, A. (2025, April 19). Perang Dagang Jilid II Pecah! AS vs China Saling Serang Pakai Tarif . Kabar24 Bisnis. https://kabar24.bisnis.com/read/20250404/19/1866693/perang-dagang-jilid-ii-pecah-as-vs-china-saling-serang-pakai-tarif

Sari, R., Ismira, A., & Khaldun, R. I. (2023). Retaliasi China terhadap Amerika Serikat dalam Konteks Perang Dagang. Hasanuddin Journal of International Affairs, 3(2), 2775–3336.

Savira, G. N. (2022). KESESUAIAN PRINSIP RETALIASI DALAM KASUS PERANG PERDAGANGAN ANTARA AMERIKA SERIKAT DAN TIONGKOK. Belli Ac Pacis, 8(2), 97–108. https://ustr.gov/

Sitorus, D. S. (2021). Perang Dagang Amerika Serikat dan Tiongkok: Bagaimana Dampaknya Bagi Perekonomian Indonesia Tahun 2017-2020? Jurnal Pendidikan Ekonomi Undiksha, 13(1), 187–196. http://dx.doi.org/1

Suganda, R., Negeri Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, I., Kunci, K., Yuridis, P., & Ekonomi Syariah Saran, dan. (2022). Metode Pendekatan Yuridis Dalam Memahami Sistem Penyelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah. Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi Islam, 8(03), 2859–2866. https://doi.org/10.29040/jiei.v8i3.6485

The Times. (2025, April 17). Nvidia, AMD, ASMT, hit By Trump’s Clampdown On AI Chip. https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/nvidia-faces-55bn-hit-from-trump-clampdown-on-ai-chips-qk15d03nq

Victoria, A. O. (2019, September 16). Ekspor-Impor Indonesia ke Tiongkok dan AS Turun Dampak Perang Dagang. Kata Data. https://katadata.co.id/finansial/makro/5e9a4e6de28a3/ekspor-impor-indonesia-ke-tiongkok-dan-as-terdampak-perang-dagang#:~:text=Perang%20dagang%20yang%20tak%20berkesudahan%20antara%20Amerika%20Serikat,periode%20delapan%20bulan%20pertama%20tahun%20ini%20mengalami%20penurunan,

Wirayani, P. (2018). AS akan Kenakan Bea Masuk Impor Baja dan Alumunium. CNBC Indonesia. https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/20180302065654-4-5979/as-akan-kenakan-bea-masuk-impor-baja-dan-alumunium

Wolf, A., & Chen, W. (2025, March 28). Can Emerging Markets Survive Trade War II. J.P. Morgan Private Bank . https://privatebank.jpmorgan.com/apac/en/insights/markets-and-investing/can-emerging-markets-survive-trade-war-II