The Theater of Physical Security: What Indonesia Teaches Us About Real vs. Perceived Protection

We're in Indonesia again for a few weeks doing some work as well as getting some much-needed R&R. While the archipelago nation offers incredible cultural experiences and stunning landscapes, it also provides a sobering reminder of how geopolitical instability can expose the theatrical nature of physical security measures worldwide.

The Current Climate: Unrest Beneath the Surface

Indonesia's political landscape has grown increasingly volatile in recent months. Student-led protests have erupted across major cities, with demonstrators challenging everything from labor reforms to environmental policies. In Jakarta, Surabaya, and other metropolitan areas, we've witnessed crowds of thousands taking to the streets, often met with heavy-handed responses from security forces.

The violence isn't limited to street protests. In March 2025, demonstrators burned down a police motorcycle and overran its driver during protests at the Parliament Complex in Jakarta. In Surabaya, protesters threw stones, firecrackers, plastic bottles, and other objects at guards, with one throwing a Molotov cocktail at the gate of the East Java governor's official residence. Journalists covering these events have faced death threats, with Kompas.com journalist Adhyasta Dirgantara reportedly receiving a death threat from the adjutant of the Commander of the Indonesian National Armed Forces. Tempo magazine received intimidation packages including a severed pig's head and a box of six headless rats.

The threats aren't limited to civil unrest. Local officials face increasing pressure from various factions – some political, others driven by economic grievances. Regional governors and municipal leaders have reported harassment, intimidation, and in some cases, credible threats against their safety and that of their families. In Papua, Indigenous community leaders like Vincen Kwipalo face threats and violence for refusing to sell their ancestral land to government projects, creating deeper clan divisions. The recent uptick in targeted attacks against government buildings and public facilities has created an atmosphere where everyone is looking over their shoulder.

Private citizens aren't immune either. In June 2024, journalist Rico Sempurna Pasaribu, 47, of Medan-based Tribata TV, and three members of his family were found dead inside their small wooden house in Kabanjahe after a deadly arson attack following his reporting on an army officer allegedly backing online gambling. Foreign nationals, business executives, and even tourists have found themselves caught in the crossfire of political tensions. The targeting isn't always random – there's often a calculated element that suggests organized groups are selecting specific individuals or demographics.

The conflict between police and security forces has intensified, with water cannons being used against protesters and reports of police brutality prompting condemnation from regional human rights organizations. ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights has documented a pattern of police violence and called for accountability mechanisms that remain absent.

Compounding these challenges is the pervasive corruption that undermines the very institutions meant to provide security and stability. Police forces and security agencies operate in an environment where loyalty is often purchased rather than earned. Officers supplement inadequate salaries through unofficial "fees" and selective enforcement. Security contracts are awarded based on connections rather than competence. This corruption creates a cascade effect where the people responsible for protecting facilities, personnel, and the public are compromised from the outset.

When the security apparatus itself is unreliable, it becomes impossible to build effective protective measures. Guards may be more concerned with maintaining relationships with those who pay them under the table than with actual security protocols. Police response becomes unpredictable, influenced by political considerations or financial incentives rather than public safety needs. The result is a security environment where appearance matters more than substance because the underlying system lacks the integrity necessary for genuine protection.

Security Theater: All Show, No Substance

This brings us to the core issue: the absolute joke that passes for physical security in many facilities throughout the region. Walking through supposedly "secure" locations – government buildings, corporate offices, large public locations, hotels, and even critical infrastructure – reveals a pattern of security measures that are purely cosmetic.

Let me share some specific examples from just the past few days that perfectly illustrate this theatrical approach:

The Powered-Off Metal Detector Performance: At a public building in Jakarta, security personnel dutifully directed everyone through walk-through metal detectors. The ritual was complete – remove items from pockets, walk through slowly, wait for the all-clear signal. The problem? The machines weren't even powered on. No lights, no sounds, no actual detection capability. Just an expensive piece of equipment serving as an elaborate doorway while guards went through the motions of operating "high-tech" security.

The Bag X-Ray Charade: At another facility, I watched as security personnel fed bags and purses through an X-ray machine with great ceremony. The screen was active, images were being generated, and the operator was positioned "attentively" at the monitor. But as I observed over several minutes, not once did the operator actually look at the screen. They were having a conversation with colleagues, checking their phone, looking everywhere except at the images meant to reveal threats. To test this, I deliberately left a knife in my bag during my next visit. It passed through without issue, the blade clearly visible on the screen that no one was monitoring.

The Metal Detector Wand Misuse: Security personnel equipped with handheld metal detection wands demonstrated a complete lack of understanding about their proper use. These devices are designed for scanning people, not vehicles, yet I repeatedly observed guards attempting to use them for vehicle inspections - waving them around car exteriors and undercarriages as if they were some kind of bomb detection equipment. When used correctly on people, the procedure was equally flawed - guards holding the wands too far from individuals, moving too quickly to detect anything, and in many cases using devices that weren't even functioning. I watched one guard spend several minutes conducting what appeared to be a thorough person scan with a wand that wasnt powered on, the LED indicator never once lighting up.

The Badge Check Ritual: ID verification consistently followed the same pattern – a brief glance at credentials, sometimes not even checking names against visitor lists, and zero verification of photo identification. At one facility, I watched a guard spend more time examining the lamination quality of badges than actually verifying the identity of the person carrying them.

The Neighborhood Gate Attendant Illusion: Perhaps nowhere is the disconnect between security theater and actual protection more evident than in private residential neighborhoods. Across Jakarta and other major cities, gated communities employ "security" personnel who function more as gate attendants than actual security officers. These individuals - typically paid minimal wages with zero formal training - spend their days mechanically opening and closing gates for cars and motorcycles without any

meaningful screening or threat assessment.

The routine is always the same: a vehicle approaches, the guard emerges from a small booth, opens the gate, waves the vehicle through, and closes the gate behind them. No identification checks, no verification of residency or visitor status, no logging of entries and exits. In the current climate of civil unrest and targeted threats, these guards provide residents with a false sense of security while offering virtually no actual protection. They have no communication protocols for emergencies, no training on threat recognition, and no authority or capability to respond to actual security incidents.

Most concerning is that residents genuinely believe these gate attendants provide meaningful security. They make decisions about personal safety, property security, and family protection based on the assumption that having "security" at the gate translates to actual protection. In reality, these understaffed, undertrained, and underpaid individuals would be the first to flee in any genuine security situation, leaving residents more vulnerable than if they had acknowledged the lack of real protection from the beginning.

The personnel manning these positions are frequently underpaid, undertrained, and unmotivated. They're going through the motions of security without understanding the fundamentals of threat assessment, situational awareness, or emergency response. More critically, they've been given tools and equipment without any meaningful training on how to use them effectively. When real incidents occur, these systems collapse immediately.

The Dangerous Disconnect

What makes this particularly concerning is the disconnect between perceived and actual security. Organizations and individuals operate under the assumption that existing measures provide meaningful protection. They make decisions about facility access, personnel movement, and operational security based on a false sense of security.

The examples I've witnessed in Indonesia perfectly illustrate this dangerous gap. Residents in gated communities adjust their security behaviors believing that gate attendants provide genuine protection, when in reality they're getting little more than automated door service. Corporate executives approve facility access protocols based on the presence of X-ray machines and metal detectors, never realizing that the equipment isn't being monitored or is completely non-functional. Government officials operate under the assumption that security checkpoints provide meaningful screening, unaware that personnel are using detection equipment incorrectly or that the devices aren't even powered on.

This creates multiple vulnerabilities:

• Complacency: People become less vigilant when they believe security is "handled"

• Predictability: Theatrical security follows obvious patterns that actual threats can easily circumvent

• Resource Misallocation: Money spent on ineffective measures could fund real security improvements

• Response Failures: When incidents occur, the lack of genuine preparedness becomes catastrophically apparent

• Cascading Trust Issues: When people discover that security measures are theatrical, they lose faith in all protective systems, even legitimate ones

Beyond Southeast Asia: A Global Problem

While Indonesia provides a stark example, this phenomenon isn't limited to emerging markets or politically unstable regions. We've observed similar security theater in developed nations, corporate environments, and even within organizations that should know better.

The fundamental issue is that security is often viewed as a compliance checkbox rather than a strategic necessity. Organizations implement measures that look good on paper, satisfy regulatory requirements, or appease stakeholders without actually addressing real threats.

Building Genuine Security

Real physical security starts with understanding actual threats, not perceived ones. It requires:

• Threat Assessment: Conducting honest evaluations of what you're actually protecting against, not what you think you should be protecting against.

• Layered Defense: Implementing multiple complementary security measures rather than relying on single points of failure.

• Trained Personnel: Investing in security staff who understand their role beyond just wearing a uniform and checking boxes.

• Regular Testing: Continuously evaluating security effectiveness through exercises, audits, and real-world scenarios.

• Adaptive Measures: Recognizing that security isn't static – it must evolve with changing threat landscapes.

The Cost of Getting It Wrong

The consequences of security theater become apparent when real incidents occur. Whether it's civil unrest, targeted attacks, or opportunistic crime, inadequate security measures collapse under pressure. The result is often far more damaging than if organizations had acknowledged their vulnerabilities from the beginning.

In Indonesia's current environment, this isn't theoretical. The ongoing protests and civil unrest have exposed how quickly theatrical security measures fail under pressure. When crowds of demonstrators approach facilities protected by guards who don't understand their equipment, powered-off metal detectors, and unmonitored screening systems, the facade crumbles immediately.

I've observed how neighborhood "security" personnel – those gate attendants masquerading as protective forces – simply abandon their posts when tensions rise. The residents who adjusted their security behaviors based on the belief that they had professional protection suddenly find themselves more vulnerable than if they had planned for reality from the start. Corporate facilities discover that their expensive screening equipment provides no barrier to determined individuals who understand that the X-ray operators aren't actually watching their screens.

The corruption that permeates the security apparatus compounds these failures. When actual incidents occur, response becomes unpredictable and unreliable. Guards who have been focused on maintaining relationships with those who pay them under the table may prioritize their own safety over their supposed protective duties. Police response becomes influenced by political considerations rather than public safety needs, leaving organizations and individuals to face threats with compromised or absent official support.

The pattern repeats globally – from corporate facilities to government buildings to public spaces. But in environments like Indonesia, where civil unrest coincides with systemic corruption, the consequences are amplified. The stakes are higher, the threats are more immediate, and the failure of security theater can have life-or-death implications.

Moving Forward

As security professionals, we have a responsibility to challenge security theater wherever we encounter it. This means having difficult conversations with clients about the difference between looking secure and being secure. It means designing systems that actually work rather than systems that simply appear to work.

However, addressing security theater in environments like Indonesia requires acknowledging the systemic challenges that create and perpetuate these problems.

Corruption within police and security forces can't be ignored when developing protective strategies. Economic constraints that lead to underpaid, untrained personnel must be factored into realistic security planning. Cultural and political factors that prioritize appearance over substance need to be addressed through education and demonstration of value.

The solutions aren't always simple or inexpensive. Building genuine security in challenging environments often requires:

• Working Around Systemic Issues: Recognizing that local security forces may be compromised and developing alternative approaches that don't rely on their integrity or competence.

• Investing in Proper Training: Understanding that effective security requires ongoing education, not just the purchase of equipment. This may mean bringing in external trainers or developing internal capabilities that can sustain proper procedures.

• Creating Accountability Mechanisms: Implementing systems that ensure security measures actually function as intended, including regular testing, auditing, and performance verification.

• Building Layered Independence: Developing security approaches that don't rely on single points of failure, particularly when those points involve personnel or systems that may be compromised.

The geopolitical climate in Indonesia – like many regions worldwide – demands genuine security solutions, but it also requires realistic approaches that account for local challenges. The luxury of maintaining appearances while ignoring substance is a risk that organizations and individuals can no longer afford, but the path forward must be practical and sustainable within existing constraints.

Physical security isn't about checking boxes or creating impressive-looking procedures. It's about creating real barriers to real threats, implemented by people who understand what they're protecting and why it matters.

The theater must end. The question is: will it end by choice, or by force of circumstances?

What security theater have you encountered in your travels or work? Share your experiences and insights in the comments below.

Ready to move beyond security theater? Let's discuss how to build genuine protection for your organization.

📅 Schedule a consultation

📧 Email: keith@redcellsecurity.org

🌐 Web: www.redcellsecurity.org