The Free Nutritious Meals (MBG) program is currently in the public spotlight. The large budget allocation, reaching hundreds of trillions, has sparked intense debate, ranging from accusations of populism to concerns about governance.
It is argued that this debate often forgets the most fundamental aspect, namely that MBG is part of a long-term defense strategy.
According to this view, no matter how great the curriculum, how sophisticated the weaponry, or how magnificent the military bases, everything is fragile if the next generation grows up malnourished. Children who lack nutrition not only have difficulty absorbing knowledge but also grow into weak human resources, both physically and cognitively.
“In the long term, this means Indonesia loses its reserve of national strength, both in the civilian and military spheres,” it was explained.
A number of international studies are cited that confirm the importance of early nutritional intervention. A Nature (2023) study shows that nutritional intervention at an early age can significantly improve cognitive scores.
UNICEF (2023) data states that malnourished children are more frequently absent, have lower achievement, and decreased productivity in adulthood. Nutrition Reviews (2014) found that deficiencies in iron and iodine are directly linked to decreased concentration, memory, and academic performance.
“Education without nutrition is like a fighter jet without fuel. It will not function optimally, and could even stop completely,” it was emphasized.
From a defense management perspective, MBG falls into the category of non-military defense. Defense, it is argued, is not only about weapons, tanks, and fighter jets, but also about human resilience.
“The concept of total defense affirms that the people are the most vital component of defense. A nation whose young generation is healthy, intelligent, and well-nourished will be better prepared to build strength in research, technology, and the defense industry,” it was said.
Conversely, if a generation grows up malnourished, Indonesia will only become a “spectator” on the global stage, both in the economic and defense sectors. Therefore, it was emphasized, stopping MBG is tantamount to weakening the foundation of the nation’s defense at its roots.
However, it is acknowledged that criticism is still necessary, especially regarding governance. “The risks of populism, potential for corruption, or budget waste are legitimate concerns. But criticism should be directed at improving governance, not stopping the program,” it was stated.
Several things are mentioned that must be strictly maintained: namely, budget transparency, so the public knows where funds are allocated; the quality of balanced nutritious menus, with the fulfillment of important micronutrients such as iron, iodine, zinc, and omega-3; equitable distribution, especially to underdeveloped regions; and public oversight, to prevent the program from being hijacked for short-term political interests. “We may have different political views, but the issue of children’s nutrition should be a national consensus,” it was emphasized.
It was concluded by emphasizing that MBG is not merely a “lunch box program,” but a long-term strategic investment.
“In this era of global competition, national defense is not sufficient with modern weapons alone. We need a population that is healthy, capable, and intelligent. In short, national resilience begins at our children’s dining tables,” it was stated.
