1. Introduction

Indonesia has a variety of tribes, cultures, languages, and religions. This shows that Indonesia is a multicultural country, meaning that Indonesia has various values from each culture, religion, and ethnicity that are firmly held by the community. Although they are different, the fundamental values of all the differences (race, religion, culture) are united by Pancasila with the motto “Bhinneka Tunggal Ika” (Unity in Diversity). For example, in the Bugis ethnic community in South Sulawesi, the values that become the philosophy of life for the people are Sipakatau’, sipakainge’, sipakale’bi. Sipakatau means to humanise one another, sipakainge’ means reminding each other so that each individual is protected from deviant actions, and sipakale’bi means mutual respect and praise for each other. The Javanese value “Urip iku urup” means making us live usefully by helping people around us. Even though these two values come from two different tribes, they have the same philosophy. These meanings are contained in one of the values of state defence in point two, “Awareness of the nation and state.” We can conclude that basically all cultures in Indonesia adhere to the values of state defence. This shows that, even though the Indonesian people come from different religions, ethnicities and cultures, they must participate in state defence.

The Indonesian security system follows a universal design, meaning that it involves all citizens, territories, and other national sources as mandated in Article 27 (3) from the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, that “Every citizen has the right and obligation to participate in state security efforts” and Article 30 (1), “Every citizen has the right and duty to participate in national security and state defence efforts.” This effort aims to uphold state sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the nation’s safety from all threats. For these overall goals to be achieved, Indonesia must ensure that all Indonesian people are willing to succeed. However, when we look at the level of civic participation, the World Justice Project shows only 0.65, which means that Indonesia still needs better ways to increase public participation (World Justice Project, 2020). Through this participation, there is an effort to defend the country that will create awareness and a sense of responsibility and concern for others to maintain the integrity and unity of the community and nation (Eckstein, Noack and Gniewosz, 2012; Tippe, 2017).

The Indonesian people believe that advancing Indonesia is the government’s responsibility, but all elements of society. The history of Indonesia has proven that society has played a role in bringing about change for this nation. It is continuing to drive these changes. The government should be a forum for ideas and a vehicle for carrying out actions so that in the end, society will become the object of development and become the subject as the motor of development itself. It means that the community must also have the opportunity to participate in developing the nation and state. One of the nation’s development and state efforts can be through participation in the state defence effort.

Participation in state defence and security does not always have to do with defence equipment or military action. It can be in the form of joint activities to solve all problems by including the values of Pancasila in its resolution. Defence and security participation can be interpreted as citizens’ voluntary activities, where they participate in state defence and security, which is manifested in the form of state defence. State defence is the attitude and behaviour of the Indonesian people, which is imbued with and interpreted in everyday life based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia to ensure the survival of the nation and state. Until now, no data shows the level of people’s willingness to participate in the state defence effort. In increasing the people’s willingness to participate, it must go through a trust approach.

One of the topics that have always been studied in political science is related to political trust (See e.g Hetherington, 1998; Hetherington and Husser, 2012; Marien and Hooghe, 2011; Noordzij, De Koster and Van Der Waal, 2021; Rudolph and Evans, 2005). Political trust is considered essential to achieve for a good system to be run and for increasing political participation. Indonesia, according to the results of a survey by the Central Statistics Agency, has 268 million people (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2020) who must fulfil all their needs, including public trust, so that all decisions and matters regulated by the government are carried out correctly and get community support. Indonesia must ensure that every citizen can feel represented by the Indonesian government’s political decisions so that disputes and conflicts do not occur that can divide the integrity of the nation and state.

Political decisions made and implemented by the government will involve and influence public participation, including the willingness to defend the country to maintain the unity and integrity of the Indonesian nation. When we look at the existing data, the Indonesian government’s level of trust has still not reached the minimum target. It has been recorded that the Indonesian people’s trust in the government since 2012–2018 is 36%, 49%, 49%, 65%, 58%, 71%, and 73%, respectively (Ries et al., 2018) and in 2019 at 75% (Ries et al., 2019). Research data in 2019 in Makassar City, one of the cities in Indonesia, shows that youth trust in the government in 2019 was 62% and Regional Parliament 50%, which means that trust is still poor. Then, in 2020, it was 55% in the government and 53% in the DPRD (Bakar, 2020).

Community participation is influenced by public trust. Trust has a significant influence on community participation. Hetherington (Blind, 2007) argues that government trust is an essential and independent predictor in supporting the government’s policies that will influence political participation and community alignments. In this research, the policy in question is more about state defence efforts. Other research conducted by several previous researchers (Akhrani, Imansari and Faizah, 2018; Anggraini, Asrinaldi and Zetra, 2018; Wahyudi et al., 2013), conducted in various cities in Indonesia regarding the effect of trust on participation, shows a significant relationship: the greater the individual political trust, the greater the automatic political participation. Trust itself is an essential predictor in increasing community participation, especially in efforts to defend the country.

In addition, one of the factors that influence the growth of the public trust is through the condition of positive emotional relationships in the form of a sense of safety (Febrieta and Pertiwi, 2018; Lewicki, 2006; Maslow, 1987; Vornanen et al., 2018). Based on research conducted by Febrieta and Pertiwi (2018), a sense of safety had a 71% effect on increasing trust. To increase the public’s willingness to participate in the state defence effort. Indonesia must ensure that people feel safe. Unfortunately, based on the World Justice Project (2020) on the indicators of order and security, Indonesia is ranked 82 out of 128 countries, with 0.68 points, and the right to live and feel safe is 0.51. In the report on the world happiness index in 2020, Indonesia is ranked 84 with 5,286 points, and there has been no significant change since 2008, even the changes tend to be minus with 0.004 points (Layard et al., 2020). This shows that the sense of safety has not been well felt.

Furthermore, knowledge related to state defence and security conditions is a process that a person goes through in obtaining an attitude and orientation towards the security phenomenon that exists in the society where that person is located. Knowledge influences trust (Bouckaert and Van De Walle, 2014; Handaningrum and Rini, 2014; Rompf, 2012). The low level of trust will automatically affect the people’s willingness to participate in efforts to defend the country.

This study aims to determine the trust variable as a mediator between a sense of safety, knowledge and willingness to participate in the state defence effort and its influence between variables. The plus advantage of this article also examines the level of trust, sense of security, knowledge and willingness to participate in the current condition. It will therefore provide an overview of the efforts that can be made to increase the willingness to participate in state defence effort

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Trust

Trust is a positive expectation of an individual or institution generated through a simple action system (Colquitt, Scott and LePine, 2007). Public participation will be low when public trust is low (Akhrani, Imansari and Faizah, 2018; Anggraini, Asrinaldi and Zetra, 2018; Blind, 2007; Inoguchi and Hotta, 2017; Wahyudi et al., 2013). Citizens trust the government and its institutions, such as the police, only when satisfied with how their institutions operate (Grimmelikhuijsen and Knies, 2017; Lühiste, 2006). Trust in security emphasises that security is trusted to ward off and dispel Threats, Disturbances, Obstacles, and Challenges. Both from outside and inside to be able to control it. Trust is divided into macro and micro (Blind, 2007). Macro trust includes individual expectations of groups and existing institutions as a unit, which is seen as the country’s general government, which refers to the public’s evaluation of the whole system and the government’s performance. Micro or individual trust occurs when trust is directed towards specific individuals in a perspective that involves a public-oriented trust in the government through individuals. Other research conducted by several previous researchers undertaken in various cities in Indonesia regarding the effect of trust on participation shows a significant relationship, that is, the higher the individual’s trust, the higher the participation automatically (Akhrani, Imansari and Faizah, 2018; Anggraini, Asrinaldi and Zetra, 2018; Wahyudi, Milla and Muluk, 2017).

Mishler and Rose (2001) use different terms to explain trust, namely a cultural perspective and institutional theory. The cultural perspective explains that trust is an interpersonal trust formed through life stages that involve emotions that will lead to institutions and affect individual performance assessment. The cultural perspective emphasises the influence of the environment in the long term and affects individual differences in seeing trust. The cultural perspective explains that trust is influenced by individual backgrounds such as gender, age, education, preferences, and minority status.

Institutional Theory explains that institutions with satisfactory performance will be trusted by the public, while institutions with poor performance or not according to public expectations will be distrusted by the public, and scepticism will arise. Trust forms the fulfilment of people’s expectations of the institution’s performance or public expectations, which means that trust affects institutional performance. Institutional and individual trust is a categorisation based on the object to which the trust is directed. Trust also has variants based on individuals’ different types of motivation when trusting their institutions or leaders. Both cultural and institutional theory emphasise the importance of democracy in shaping political trust but they reach the opposite conclusion (Lu, Qi and Yu, 2019).

The different perspectives on lack of trust in the ongoing government has affected the distrust of institutions, supervisors, and the system, and will affect public participation (Blind, 2007). Recent research from Hetherington argues that government trust is an essential and independent predictor in supporting government policies to influence public participation and alignments (Hetherington, 1998).

A study conducted by Mishler and Rose in 10 countries showed that using an Institutional Theory perspective or macro trust in predicting public trust was considered more significant and had more impact Mishler and Rose (2001). Other research conducted by several previous researchers (Akhrani, Imansari and Faizah, 2018; Anggraini, Asrinaldi and Zetra, 2018; Wahyudi et al., 2013) in various cities in Indonesia regarding the effect of trust on participation shows a significant relationship, that is, the higher the individual’s trust, the higher the participation automatically (Akhrani, Imansari and Faizah, 2018; Anggraini, Asrinaldi and Zetra, 2018; Wahyudi et al., 2013).

2.2. Sense of Safety

According to Maslow (1987), sense of safety is a need that encourages individuals to obtain peace, certainty, and order from environmental conditions. The need for security is not limited to physical security, but psychological security, which is related to security guarantees, a system stability that prevents people from feeling anxious, worried, and various other things. A sense of safety is a right and willingness inherent in human beings, and Personal Security, which the government must immediately consider as a form of enforcement of Human Security (Adinda, 2019). Individuals will place their trust in the organisation when they feel safe (Baran, Rhoades and Miller, 2012).

Security is one of the needs that include the need to be protected and kept away from sources of danger, both from physical and psychological threats. Research conducted by Suprapti and Nashori (2007) on students found that when the individual’s sense of safety is high, the intensity of individual participation will be low. When individuals do not feel safe, then their participation will tend to be high.

One of the factors that influence the growth of trust is that people can have a sense of trust when they have a positive psychological orientation, namely the condition of positive emotional relationships in the form of a sense of safety (Lewicki, 2006). Without security, there is no welfare. Safety is built every day by a sense of safety (Vornanen et al., 2018). This nation needs security and a sense of safety, and the army is one of the nation’s essential assets in maintaining security and the police as safety guards (Alvons, 2018).

Based on research conducted by Febrieta and Pertiwi (2018), a sense of safety had a 71% effect on increasing trust. Security needs are formed based on order, law, peace, protection, physical security, freedom from threatening forces such as war, riots, and danger (Liu and Luo, 2012).

According to Maslow (1987), the sense of safety can be divided into two aspects, namely:

  1. The need to be protected. The fulfilment of this need for security is related to feeling safe and constantly feeling protected from all threats that exist in the environment

  2. Away from sources of physical and psychological danger. To get a sense of psychological and physical safety, a human being must understand what is expected of others, including family members. Being away from the source of this physical and psychological danger is like being free from fear and free from anxiety.

It is clearly found that a sense of safety influences nationalism, which is based on two aspects, namely the need to be protected and to feel far from physical and psychological threats. Because without a sense of safety, welfare will not exist, and without the welfare of nationalism will be reduced because people’s needs are not met.

2.3. Knowledge in National Security

Knowledge results from individual curiosity and experience processed through the five senses, which will form a perspective and mindset on an object to recognise and understand the events or conditions. Knowledge itself has these levels: (1) Know, recalling the material that was explicitly studied; (2) Comprehension, the ability to adequately explain the object being studied and being able to interpret it correctly and measurably; (3) Application, means using concepts learned in everyday life; (4) Analysis, describes the broader core of the concepts studied; (5) Synthesis, connecting learning outcomes with various other objects; and (6) Evaluation, to evaluate material and object objectively.

Public participation can only increase if intensive state defence education takes place for the public. This education includes basic principles related to national ideology, politics and rigorous systems, economy, socio-culture, and defence-security, which are necessary to equate government development program perceptions. It is hoped that people’s views on the nation’s life and livelihoods will align with the increasing public perception of development, such as (1) increasing awareness of society, nation, and state; (2) the more open the mind and will to fight for their rights; (3) the increasing ability to make choices in meeting the needs of life; (4) the increasing ability to solve problems in line with the higher education level, which supports advances in science and technology, and (5) the more critical and open society is to new ideas.

Knowledge of Indonesia’s national security is an individual’s perspective on himself and his environment by prioritising a national view that originates from the Pancasila and is based on the 1945 Constitution to recognise the self and the environment by prioritising national unity and integrity, as well as regional unity, in carrying out the life of the public, nation, and state to achieve national goals. The basic form of knowledge on national security is (1) awareness of the territory, which means understanding the boundaries of Indonesia’s territory, which consists of thousands of islands connected by Pereira; (2) the core organisational structure, relating to the form and sovereignty of the state, governmental power, government systems, and representative systems, and (3) organisational completeness, which means political and state awareness that all people must possess, including political parties, groups, and public organisations, as well as supporting tools such as the military and police.

Knowledge of defence and security plays a role in developing and strengthening attitudes among citizens and in training public members to play appropriate roles. Suppose the public knows enough about the state defence and security system. In that case, they can distinguish the various components and understand how defence and security are regulated and function and are implemented by the public themselves. Knowledge affects individual trust, with individuals knowing positive things tending to trust (Rompf, 2012). One of the variables often mentioned is education and the expectation that the higher the level of public knowledge, the more trust the government would have (Bouckaert and Van De Walle, 2014).

2.4. Willingness to Participate

Participation determines the attitude and involvement of each individual’s willingness in the organisation’s situation and conditions. It then encourages the individual to participate in achieving organisational goals and take part in every collective accountability (Dermody, Hanmer-Lloyd and Scullion, 2010). Participation is the involvement of individuals in the situation and conditions of their organisation. This involvement can encourage individuals to participate in activities carried out by the organisation, namely, political parties (Haryadi et al., 2015). Political trust can be seen as an indicator of citizens’ normative expectations of the government and politics. A higher level of political trust means that citizens are the foundation of the government’s legitimacy and decision-making process (Wang, 2016). Both institutional and individual political trust influence each other, with knowledge as an essential variable in the market (Rungsithong and Meyer, 2020). Therefore, when a personal sense of safety increases, it is an effective way to improve individual participation (Guoyu and Chuanlong, 2012). Participation is an activity of individuals or groups to actively participate in political activities, among other things by participating in existing processes as a form of love for the nation.

Participation in state defence and security is not always connected with Main Defence Systems or military action. Nevertheless, it can be in the form of joint activities to solve all problems by including the values of Pancasila in its resolution (Indonesia Defense Ministry, 2018). Defence and security participation is interpreted as citizens’ voluntary activities, where they participate in state defence and security, which manifests itself in state defence. Public participation in efforts to defend a country can be defined from various perspectives, including environmental, educational, and other aspects. However, it does not mean that public participation will emerge because it has become part of a country. Public participation is still influenced by a sense of safety and knowledge related to state defence and security manifested in trust. Research by Leal and Teigen in 2018 into the military found that experience in a particular government agency helps citizens participate in the political process, especially those who are otherwise unlikely to vote (Leal and Teigen, 2018).

2.5. State Defence

State defence is the Indonesian people’s attitude and behaviour imbued with and interpreted in daily life based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia to ensure the nation’s survival and state. The conception of state defence stated in Article 27 (3) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia that. “Every citizen has the right and obligation to participate in efforts to defend the state” and Article 30 (1). “Every citizen has the right and obligation to participate in national defence and security efforts.” which means that all Indonesian people are obliged to make efforts to defend the state based on the values of state defence, namely love for the motherland, awareness of the nation and state, have a belief in Pancasila, are willing to sacrifice, and have the essential ability to defend the country (Susanto, 2020; Tippe, 2017).

In Article 2 Letter “g” Presidential Regulation No. 8 of 2021 concerning the General Policy of National Defence for 2020–2024 states that “The enhancement of non-military defence capabilities carried out by ministries outside the field of defence, institutions and regional governments by optimizing the utilization of national resources for the benefit of national defence.” This paragraph’s meaning is clear that the overall behaviour and programmes launched by ministries, agencies, and local governments outside the defence sector must include the points of interest of national defence in the programme’s procurement objectives. This means that the entire programme must be synergistic by using all the national resources that it owns. It continues specifically in Article 4 paragraph (1) letter b, namely “Ministers, institutional leaders, and regional heads in determining policies following their respective duties, functions, and authorities to protect national interests and support national policies in the defence sector.” This means that the entire programme must be based on how the development of its resources is based on the defence sector’s approach. Then, it is also explained very clearly that the Ministry of Defence is a pioneer in implementing this presidential regulation regarding article 4 paragraph (2) which reads, “The minister who administers government affairs in the defence sector coordinates the implementation of policies regarding the implementation of national defence as referred to in paragraph (1) letter a.” This clarifies that the Ministry of Defence, as a pioneer in programme development at other ministries, can achieve state defence education coordinated by the Ministry of Defence to safeguard and achieve national goals and interests.

State defence is citizens’ attitude and behaviour imbued with their love for the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, which is based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia to ensure the nation’s survival and state. This conception of state defence is a unique and distinctive aspect of Indonesia’s efforts to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity and to face threats, disturbances, obstacles, and challenges from the outside world. This state defence activity aims to protect national interests.

The value of love for the country means knowing, understanding, loving the national territory, protecting and preserving, and loving everything that is owned by the nation – pride in the Indonesian nation, maintaining the proper name of the Indonesian country and state, contributing and progressing to the Indonesian government and state, loving domestic products, Indonesian culture, and arts, and being aware and ready to defend the country against various threats, opposition, attacks, and disturbances that endanger the nation’s independence and all its components.

The value of Nation and State Awareness means maintaining unity and integrity, starting from the environment of the family, society, education, work, and ethnic groups. Understanding cultural diversity, ethnicities, religions, languages, and customs, the nation and state’s awareness can also be described as recognising, appreciating, and respecting the Indonesian Flag. The state symbol and the national anthem exercise the rights and obligations as contained in the laws and regulations, prioritise the nation’s interests above personal, family, or group interests, and participate in the nation’s development.

Pancasila is used as a guideline and an outlook on life for the Indonesian people in society, and state to achieve national goals. The feeling of confidence in Pancasila as the central ideology is achieved by growing awareness of the values in Pancasila, practising Pancasila in everyday life, making Pancasila the unifier of the Indonesian nation and state. Next comes continuously developing the values of Pancasila, being loyal to Pancasila, and believing in it as the basis of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia.

The value of being willing to sacrifice means voluntarily sacrificing oneself for the nation and state by sacrificing time, energy, thoughts, and property for the public interest. Ready to sacrifice body and soul for the sake of defending the nation and state. Furthermore, actively participating in developing society, nation, state, and care for fellow Indonesians.

The value of having the raw ability to defend the country means that people are required to have the ability to participate in state defence activities measured physically and psychologically. Physically involves someone who engages in protecting the government must have a health condition and physical skills to support the state defence’s initial psychiatric ability. Meanwhile, psychologically (mentally), a person needs to be disciplined, resilient, obey all applicable laws and regulations, believe in one’s abilities, endure trials and never give up in the face of difficulties in achieving national goals.

The conception of state defence is a value that reflects the patriotism and nationalism that the Indonesian nation needs to develop and defend Indonesia’s sovereignty from various threats, disturbances, obstacles, and challenges that come from within and outside the country. The application of the value of state defence must be possessed by the TNI/POLRI and all Indonesian people to achieve this conception of state defence. The conception of state defence is complex, and it is essential to be understood and implemented by all Indonesian citizens. Therefore, through the Ministry of Defence, the government should implement State Defence education along various lines and in sectors primarily focused on youth (Rangkuti, 2016).

2.6. Trust, Participation, and Sense of Safety

The level of trust in Makassar in DRPD is only 53.9% (Ilham and Pratama, 2016). In the 2014–2019 period, it was 80%, and in 2009–2014 only 57.7% (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2018). The level of public trust in political parties is only 32.5% (Merdeka.com, 2018). Furthermore, based on the Indonesian Central Statistics Agency, the proportion of the population who felt safe walking alone in the area where they lived in 2017 was 53.32 (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2017). It indicates that the public sense of safety level is relatively low, which is very likely to affect public trust, which will affect the public’s willingness to participate in State security. Civic participation is only at point 0.65 (World Justice Project, 2020), which means Indonesia still needs better ways to increase public participation. It means that Indonesia’s defence system must build not only in the area of defence equipment but also a sense of safety and public knowledge. The results of a survey conducted by the Indonesian Academy of Science related to the participation level in general show that only 63% of Indonesians are disinterested in Indonesia’s political and governance issues, including defence and security LIPI (2012).

2.7. Research Framework and Hypothesis

Based on the above discussion, the hypothesis below shows that (See Figure 1):

H1: Trust has a significant influence on the willingness to participate in state defence.

H2: Sense of safety has a direct effect on the willingness to participate in state defence.

H3: A sense of safety has a significant impact on trust.

H4: Knowledge directly affects the willingness to participate in state defence

H5: Knowledge has a significant impact on trust.

H6: Trust is a mediator between the sense of safety and the willingness to participate in the state’s defence.

H7: Trust is a mediator between knowledge and the willingness to participate in state defence.

Figure 1

Research framework.

https://securityanddefence.pl/f/fulltexts/142656/SDQ-014-00149-g001_min.jpg

3. Methods

3.1. Research Design

Using the Structural Equation Model (SEM) model test, this research uses the quantitative approach by involving variable mediators who aim to see correlation and influence on endogenous variables with exogenous variables. Variables are first analysed through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to verify them with the given statement indicators. All statements distributed to respondents had previously been tested by looking at the validity and reliability of the scale used. Thus, a statement item was found that could be used according to the characteristics of the respondent.

The data analysis technique used to test the hypothesis is the SEM test with the help of LISREL 8.80. SEM is used as a test tool to jointly test the structural model that regulates the relationship between independent and dependent constructs and a measurement model that measures the influence between indicator variables and constructs.

SEM is a statistical analysis technique that aims to build and test statistical models in causal models with various techniques, including confirmatory, factor analysis, path analysis and regression. SEM is considered a more powerful technique because it considers interaction modelling, nonlinearity, correlated independent variables, measurement errors, correlated deviations, and multiple latent independents, which can be measured using many indicators, and one or two latent dependent variables that are measured by several indicators. SEM can be used as another stronger alternative than using multiple regression, path analysis, factor analysis, time series analysis, and covariance analysis.

3.2 Respondents, Instrument, and data analysis

Data retrieval techniques in this research used research instruments in the form of a Likert scale. The Likert scale used in this study used four different scales to uncover each variable. Researchers assume that the information obtained from respondents is reliable. Self-managed questionnaires were distributed according to predetermined characteristics. The analysis used in this study is descriptive, and the hypothesis test used is structural equation modelling (SEM) using LISREL 8.80. This study involved 435 Indonesian citizens who were over 17 years old and were not members of the TNI/POLRI. Samples in this study were taken using Simple Random Sampling. The respondents came from 34 provinces in Indonesia, with various age and gender backgrounds, and are described in the following table (see Table 1).

Table 1

Gender and age categories.

CategoryDescription
GenderMales = 137Females = 298
AgeMean = 23,74 Years

4. Results

4.1. Structural Equation Modelling Result

After data collection, the most crucial step is to choose the appropriate tool for statistical analysis. In this perspective, this study uses SEM analysis techniques, also known as structural equation modelling, to measure the relationship between research variables. SEM is a flexible and precise technique for assessing variables. SEM is a test tool to conduct joint testing between structural models that regulate independent and dependent construct relationships and measurement models that measure the influence between indicator variables and constructs. SEM collects statistical procedures to explain the relationship’s underlying foundation that governs covariances’ matrix between observed variables (Riadi, 2018). This research has used SEM tests to analyse the direct and indirect effects of variables to answer the hypothesis.

Figure 2

Measurement model.

https://securityanddefence.pl/f/fulltexts/142656/SDQ-014-00149-g002_min.jpg

Note: RA = Sense of Safety, PENG = Knowledge, KP = Public Trust, PR = Willingness to Participate.

4.2. Loading Factor Analysis

In the SEM analysis, before interpreting the variables used as hypotheses, the initial stage is to ensure validity and reliability through the loading factor value, which must show a value of more than 0.5, and is described in Table 2 and Figure 3.

Table 2

Loading factor.

RAPENGKPPR
RA10.89
RA20.68
P10.77
P20.80
KP10.88
KP20.76
KP30.84
PR10.88
PR20.82
PR30.87

[i] Note: RA = Sense of Safety, PENG = Knowledge, KP = Public Trust, PR = Willingness to Participate.

The loading factor can conclude that the overall indicator is measured above the value of 0.5, which means the whole indicator is valid and reliable.

Figure 3

2nd Confirmatory factor analysis test results.

https://securityanddefence.pl/f/fulltexts/142656/SDQ-014-00149-g003_min.jpg

Note: RA = Sense of Safety, PENG = Knowledge, KP = Public Trust, PR = willingness to Participate.

4.3. Goodness of Fit

Furthermore, before entering the Influence Hypothesis Test results, the first Goodness of Fit (GOF) measurement model shows the measurement model used in Table 3.

Table 3

Goodness of fit.

GOF SizeResultsCriteriaConclusion
Statistics X2df = 29
X2 = 62,4
•0 ≤ X2 ≤ 2df
2df < X2 ≤ 3df
Fit
NCP31.5614.14 < NCP ≤ 77.26Fit
RMSEA0.050• 0.05 < RMSEA ≤ 0.08
0 < RMSEA ≤ 0.05
Fit
Model AIC112.56Less than saturated value AIC = 306Fit
Model CAIC244.52Less than saturated CAIC = 905,8Fit
NFI0.98• NFI > 0.90
0.80 < NFI < 0.90
Fit
NNFI0.98• NNFI > 0.90
0.80 < NNFI < 0.90
Fit
CFI0.99• CFI > 0.97
0.70 < CFI < 0.97
Fit
IFI0.99• IFI > 0.90
0.80 < IFI < 0.90
Fit
RFI0.97• RFI > 0.90
0.80 < RFI < 0.90
Fit
CN345.89CN > 200Fit
SRMR0.033• SRMR ≤ 0.08
0.1 < SRMR < 0.0.8
Fit
GFI0.97• GFI > 0.90
0.80 < GFI < 0.90
Fit
AGFI0.95• AGFI > 0.89
0.80 < AGFI < 0.89
Fit

The GOF results above obtained from 435 samples processed using the SEM test with LISREL 8.80 application conclude that the research’s measurement modelling is correct or that it can be said that the model fits existing criteria (see Table 3). The next step is to decrypt the SEM results.

4.4. Structural Model: Testing Hypothesis

After confirming that the loading factor and GOF have met the criteria, further analysis under the proposed hypothesis, which is described in Table 4 and Figure 4.

Table 4

Direct result.

T-ValuesTermsDescription
KP -> PR−0.20≥ 1.96Insignificant
RA-> PR0.74≥ 1.96Insignificant
RA -> KP13.25≥ 1.96Significant
PENG -> PR10.87≥ 1.96Significant
PENG -> KP2.36≥ 1.96Significant
RA -> KP -> PR−0.20≥ 1.96Insignificant
PENG -> KP -> PR−0.19≥ 1.96Insignificant

[i] Note: RA = Sense of Safety, PENG = Knowledge, KP = Public Trust, PR = Willingness to Participate.

Of the seven hypotheses proposed, three hypotheses were accepted, and four hypotheses were rejected or declared insignificant because the value of T Values was less than 1.96.

Figure 4

T-values results.

https://securityanddefence.pl/f/fulltexts/142656/SDQ-014-00149-g004_min.jpg

Note: RA = Sense of Safety, PENG = Knowledge, KP = Public Trust, PR = Willingness to Participate.

4.5. Structural Model: Affect in Accepted Hypothesis

You can see how much influence the three hypotheses received on each variable in the Standardised Solutions value in Table 5 and Figure 5.

Figure 5

Standardised solution results.

https://securityanddefence.pl/f/fulltexts/142656/SDQ-014-00149-g005_min.jpg

Note: RA = Sense of Safety, PENG = Knowledge, KP = Public Trust, PR = Willingness to Participate.

Table 5

Effect on variables.

Standardized solutionEffect to variable
RA -> KP0.7575%
PENG -> PR0.6565%
PENG -> KP0.1212%

In Table 5 and Figure 4, the data concluded that the sense of safety variables was influenced by 75% on the Willingness variable of participating in state defence efforts. Variable Knowledge then exerts 65% on the variables of willingness to participate in state defence efforts and 12% on trust. If the security and knowledge variables are combined, it affects the trust by 64%, and other variables influence the rest. Meanwhile, suppose the variables of sense of safety, knowledge, and trust are combined. In that case, it affects the willingness to participate in state defence efforts by 45%, and the rest is influenced by other variables that are not researched.

4.6. Additional Findings

In this study, there are also additional findings outside of the research hypothesis. We found out about the level of security, knowledge related to the National security system, confidence in national security, and public willingness to participate in the state defence efforts from the questionnaire results that were distributed and calculated the percentages shown in Table 6.

Table 6

Additional findings.

YesNo
Feel safe55%45%
Know about national security79%21%
Trust to national security50%50%
Willingness to participate86%14%

The results suggest that the level of public security is still relatively low, namely 55%; knowledge related to the national security system is relatively high at 79%; confidence in national security is still 50%, and the willingness to participate in state defence efforts is relatively high at 86%.

5. Discussion

Analysis can be carried out using the hypothesis described in Table 4 and Figure 4. In Hypothesis 1 (trust has a significant influence on the willingness to participate in state defence), it is not proven that there is a direct influence between trust and the willingness to participate in state defence efforts. This finding is quite interesting because this study ultimately refutes some studies that say that trust influences the willingness to participate (Akhrani and Imansari, 2018; Anggraini, Asrinaldi and Zetra, 2018; Wahyudi et al., 2013). This can be based on the fact that participation in state defence efforts is related to how people believe in the government and their sense of safety and love for their country to feel more motivated to participate in state defence efforts. Likewise, in hypothesis 2 (sense of safety has a direct effect on the willingness to participate in state defence), it is not proven that a sense of safety did not affect the willingness to participate.

In hypothesis 6 (trust is a mediator between the sense of safety and the willingness to participate in state defence), it is not proven that trust can mediate a sense of safety and a willingness to participate in state defence efforts. Likewise, hypothesis 7 (trust is a mediator between knowledge and willingness to participate in state defence) it is not proven that trust mediates between knowledge and the willingness to participate. This is because basically, as in hypothesis 1, trust does not affect the willingness to participate in state defence, so it automatically cannot be a mediating variable. An exciting find in hypothesis 3 (sense of safety has a significant impact on trust) was that it is proven that a sense of safety affects trust. This is in line with research conducted by Febrieta and Pertiwi (2018). In Hypothesis 4 (Knowledge directly affects the willingness to participate in state defence), it is proven that knowledge influences trust. Lastly, in hypothesis 5 (Knowledge has a significant impact on trust), it is proven that knowledge influences participation. Knowledge has an evident influence on both of these variables.

In Table 5 and Figure 4, the data concluded that the Sense of safety variables was influenced by 75% on the Willingness variable of participating in state defence efforts. Variable Knowledge then exerts 65% on the variables of willingness to participate in state defence efforts and 12% on trust. If the security and knowledge variables are combined, it affects the trust by 64%, and other variables influence the rest. Meanwhile, if the variables of sense of safety, knowledge, and trust are combined, it affects the willingness to participate in state defence efforts by 45%, and the rest is influenced by other variables that are not researched.

6. Conclusion

The analysis results showed that trust variables were not proven to mediate a sense of safety and knowledge towards the willingness to participate in state defence efforts. However, in this study, it is interesting that security directly influences the willingness to participate in state defence efforts and knowledge related to National security. The direct influence of security on the willingness to participate is relatively high, namely 75%, and insufficient knowledge, which is only 12%. These findings align with the theory put forward by several researchers that a sense of safety and knowledge affects trust (Bouckaert and Van De Walle, 2014; Cook and Santana, 2018; Febrieta and Pertiwi, 2018; Lewicki, 2006; Rompf, 2012). This determines that to increase the willingness to participate in the country’s defence efforts, the most essential thing is to increase the public’s sense of safety. When the public feels safe, automatically, the willingness to participate will also increase significantly. Furthermore, providing education to the public related to National security is possible and is currently on several government agendas.

The trust variable was also found to not correlate with the willingness to participate in state defence efforts. These findings are contrary to research conducted by previous researchers in Indonesia who examined the relationship between trust and participation and found that trust affects one’s participation (Akhrani, Imansari and Faizah, 2018; Blind, 2007; Inoguchi and Hotta, 2017; Wahyudi et al., 2013). To increase the public’s willingness to participate in the state defence effort, there is no need for trust in national security at the moment. However, if the government wants to increase public confidence in National security, the critical way to do this is to provide knowledge related to the National security system. This study found that knowledge enough influence to increase public confidence related to national security, which is as high as 65%.

Through this study, we can see that only the knowledge variable on national security significantly influences the willingness to participate in state defence efforts. From the data received, public knowledge of national security is high at 79%, and the willingness to participate in state defence efforts is 86%. Through these two things, it can be concluded that information and education related to national security are the primary and essential factors in increasing people’s willingness. This means that it is necessary to establish and implement appropriate methods for providing information and education to the public about national security to achieve shared expectations through the Act.

This study also shows that security and trust are separate parts of the willingness to participate in state defence efforts amongst young people. In this case, it can be interpreted that increasing people’s willingness to participate cannot be used through a sense of security and trust approach as is often done in political research. This means that in the case of trust in national security and its influence on the willingness to participate, the situation is very different from participation and trust from a political perspective. This can be explained that when talking about the sovereignty of the nation and state defence efforts, the people themselves will not prioritise personal interests or personal expectations but prioritise the common interest. This clearly shows that Indonesian youth hold firmly to the values of Pancasila in the 3rd precept, namely “Indonesian Unity” and have the values of state defence efforts instilled in them.

In general, this research can be used as a reference for further research that specifically discusses how to increase the willingness to participate in state defence efforts by focusing on what kind of security people expect and how to improve the sense of safety, so that automatically, the public will want to participate more in the state defence effort.

We are aware following the research that several things can be improved in similar studies in the future and we recommend the variables used. The sense of safety variable does not have an effect. It is better to find other variables that can have an influence to provide a better picture that is holistically related to how reasonable efforts can be made to increase the willingness to participate. In addition, we also offer recommendations to the government, namely that current efforts to improve the willingness to participate must be carried out through the delivery of information and education related to national security. The delivery of this information and education can be achieved through discussions, scientific meetings, training, and various other methods that specifically discuss current national security to increase the sense of responsibility and sense of belonging to maintain the nation’s integrity.