[비즈한국] As the development of the Korean fighter jet KF-21 reaches its final stages, interest in its export potential has grown. However, news recently circulated, citing an Indonesian expert, claiming that Indonesia—which had signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to purchase 48 KF-21s—would only be purchasing 10. After direct verification, however, this appears to be untrue.
The sequence of events is as follows. Indonesian defense expert 'Alman Helvas Ali' wrote an article for CNBC Indonesia titled ‘Menanti Kelanjutan Program Jet Tempur KF-21 (Waiting for the Continuation of the KF-21 Fighter Jet Program).’ The content reported in Korea claimed that Indonesia would break its promise to purchase 48 units and instead purchase only about 10. Specifically, the narrative was that Indonesia would pay only 600 billion won out of the 1.6 trillion won in development cost contributions due by 2026, and would use the remaining 1 trillion won of the cut budget to purchase the KF-21. Since one KF-21 costs approximately 100 billion won, this would amount to purchasing only about 10 units.
It was also reported that relevant institutions were failing to properly respond to demands for joint development of the KF-21 Block 3, joint marketing, and the provision of the 5th prototype. If true, this would be a major failure on the part of the project leads, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) and Korea Aerospace 047810 Industries (KAI), and indeed, netizens voiced their protests following the reports.
However, after I personally verified the facts, this content was found to be untrue. The problematic Indonesian article contained no such information. The title itself, ‘Waiting for the Continuation of the KF-21 Fighter Jet Program,’ suggests otherwise, and nowhere in the article was there any mention that only 10 KF-21s should be purchased.
Furthermore, the expert who wrote the article, Alman Helvas Ali, is an Indonesia-based correspondent for IHS Jane’s, the world’s leading defense analysis service, and a professional consultant who does not casually issue provocative claims or news. Thus, the likelihood that such content was accurate was extremely low.
What happened? I conducted a direct email interview with Alman Helvas Ali, the author of the article, to clarify the facts and clear up the misunderstandings. In conclusion, Alman expressed concern that a misunderstanding occurred during the translation process into Indonesian, and that content unrelated to his article’s body or his own opinions is spreading in Korea.
Alman opposed Indonesia’s reduction of the KF-21 development cost contribution. His position is that Indonesia should not stop at the negotiation of paying 600 billion won by 2026, but must pay the remaining 1 trillion won in development contributions to the Korean side, even if it is late. However, his argument was that if the Korean side approves during the negotiation process, it is possible to repurpose the remaining 1 trillion won of development contributions toward Indonesia’s KF-21 purchase costs.
Additionally, Alman stated he never used the claim that Indonesia would only pay 1 trillion won for the KF-21 purchase, and he showed a positive stance toward Indonesia purchasing 48 KF-21s. He explained that he merely argued for using the ‘1 trillion won cut from the development budget’ as part of the ‘Indonesian KF-21 purchase budget,’ and never said that ‘Indonesia would only purchase 10 KF-21s.’
Alman did, however, advise that because the purchase of 48 KF-21s (licensed production) by Indonesia is based on an MOU that lacks binding power, a formal contract is necessary, and that negotiations between Korea and Indonesia must proceed well during this process. He even advised that the Republic of Korea should make efforts to secure a firm commitment for the purchase of 48 KF-21s when Indonesian President Subianto meets with South Korean President Lee Jae-myung at the APEC summit to be held in Gyeongju at the end of October.
In short, the Indonesian defense expert Alman is a strong supporter of purchasing the KF-21 within Indonesia and a figure who stands against negative public sentiment. His column was essentially transformed into a ‘KF-21 reductionist’ argument due to a mistranslation. While one could argue that Alman might have been dishonest in his email, since his article was pointed to as the source of the ‘10 KF-21 purchase’ news, it would be difficult for the parties involved to logically refute his direct explanation.
Everyone can make mistakes in the reporting process, but in a world where communication is instantaneous, the spread of this ‘10 KF-21 purchase’ news shows that fact-checking in the new media era is a matter of will. I have no intention of indiscriminately criticizing the breaking news and exclusive report culture of the press and new media. However, we must avoid attitudes that blow issues that could be verified with a single email into serious, blown-out-of-proportion problems.