Russia’s alleged request to station long-range military aircraft at Manuhua Air Force Base in Biak Numfor, Papua, has sent geopolitical tremors across the Indo-Pacific. First reported by respected defense outlet Janes, the revelation has unsettled Canberra, galvanized Washington, and thrown Jakarta into a diplomatic tightrope walk.
While Indonesia has publicly denied the request through Defense Minister Sjafrie Sjamsoeddin—following direct contact with Australian officials—the episode has amplified concerns about Russia’s strategic ambitions in a region already strained by Chinese militarization and great power rivalry.
This report examines the credibility of Russia’s purported move, the feasibility of sustained operations in Biak, and the broader geopolitical implications for Australia, the United States, and regional stability.
Manuhua Air Force Base is not an imposing fortress. Located on Biak Island in eastern Indonesia’s Papua province, the facility shares a runway with Frans Kaisiepo Airport. It currently hosts Indonesia’s Aviation Squadron 27, operating CN235 maritime surveillance aircraft, and the recently established 9th Air Wing, which is not yet equipped with combat aircraft.
However, its proximity to Darwin—just 1,200 kilometers away—and its location near key maritime routes leading to the South China Sea give it disproportionate strategic weight. It lies within reach of Australian defense installations, U.S. troop deployments, and major shipping lanes that are critical for regional trade and military logistics.
Biak is no stranger to global intrigue. In 2017, Russian Tu-95 bombers conducted a mission from the same airbase—brief, but revealing. The patrol, though short-lived, demonstrated Moscow’s interest in projecting force into a region often dominated by U.S.-Australian military presence.
Could Biak Support Russian Bombers?
Despite its strategic position, Manuhua is not equipped for sustained Russian operations—at least not yet. Its infrastructure is designed for light aircraft, not the heavy, long-range bombers like the Tu-95 “Bear” or Tu-160 “Blackjack” that would represent a genuine shift in power dynamics.
Russia would face a series of technical and logistical hurdles:
-
Runway limitations: While Biak’s runway is long enough for takeoffs and landings by large aircraft, its surfaces and support facilities would require upgrades to handle sustained operations by strategic bombers.
-
Fuel and maintenance logistics: Sustaining long-range aviation in a remote archipelago would demand expanded fuel storage, hardened shelters, and secure communication lines—all of which would require significant capital investment.
-
Local political will: Indonesia’s military modernization efforts are already constrained by budget limitations. Without outside funding—possibly from Russia—these upgrades are unlikely.
Given Russia’s economic constraints from sanctions and the war in Ukraine, the feasibility of these upgrades is doubtful. Moscow’s defense spending is stretched thin, raising questions about whether this reported request was symbolic, exploratory, or simply a diplomatic feint.
What Could Russia Really Deploy?
Should Russia overcome logistical barriers, several aircraft types could be candidates for deployment:
Tupolev Tu-95 “Bear”
A Cold War-era icon, the Tu-95 is slow and loud, but remains a critical asset for Russia’s strategic aviation. With a range of up to 15,000 kilometers and payload capacity of 15,000 kg, it can launch cruise missiles capable of carrying nuclear or conventional warheads.
In 2017, two Tu-95s flew from Biak in a show of force that likely served both intelligence and propaganda objectives. Their potential return—if real—would mark a calculated attempt to intimidate U.S. and Australian planners without committing Russia’s more modern and limited Tu-160 fleet.
Tupolev Tu-160 “Blackjack”
A newer, supersonic strategic bomber, the Tu-160 boasts greater speed, payload, and range than the Tu-95. It carries advanced cruise missiles like the Kh-101 and Kh-102, which have global strike capabilities.
However, the Tu-160 fleet is tiny—only 36 units were built—and expensive to maintain. The idea of basing them in Biak, given the logistical hurdles, borders on implausible, though a short-term deployment is within the realm of possibility.
Ilyushin Il-20M
Russia’s signals intelligence aircraft, the Il-20M, is more suited to Biak’s current infrastructure. With a range of about 6,500 kilometers, it’s capable of surveillance and electronic warfare operations. Its deployment would align with Russia’s 2017 mission and require less logistical overhead.
Still, the Il-20M is a less dramatic gesture than stationing bombers. Its role would be intelligence-gathering—highly effective, but less overtly threatening.
Whether the request was real or manufactured, the strategic messaging is clear: Russia wants the world to believe it can challenge the West anywhere—even in the Indo-Pacific.
The timing is telling. In February 2025, Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu met with Indonesia’s Defense Minister Sjamsoeddin. Not long after, Janes reported the request. The correlation suggests at least preliminary talks occurred.
Indonesia, under President Prabowo Subianto, has sought to expand its defense partnerships beyond the West, participating in joint naval drills with Russia in late 2024. While Jakarta officially maintains non-alignment, its actions increasingly reflect a desire to hedge its bets between the U.S., China, and now Russia.
This may be a tactical play. Russia could be testing waters, probing Indonesia’s willingness to accommodate limited presence or symbolic overflights—meant more for psychological than military effect.
Australia Reacts: Panic, Denial, and Diplomatic Hustling
The initial report sent Canberra into high alert. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese sought urgent clarification from Jakarta. Within 24 hours, Defense Minister Richard Marles was on the phone with his Indonesian counterpart.
Sjamsoeddin’s assurance that the reports were “untrue” cooled tensions temporarily, but the damage was done. The possibility that Australia learned of such a consequential development from foreign media raised alarm bells.
Opposition Leader Peter Dutton pounced, calling it a “catastrophic failure” of diplomacy and intelligence. While perhaps opportunistic during an election cycle, the criticism struck a nerve in Canberra’s defense community.
Whether or not the request materialized, the idea that Indonesia might even entertain it calls into question Australia’s assumptions about Jakarta’s loyalties.
Indonesia’s public denial does not mean the issue is closed. Jakarta may be deliberately ambiguous—downplaying discussions with Russia to avoid alienating Australia, while preserving the option to cooperate with Moscow behind closed doors.
There’s precedent for this approach. Indonesia has historically balanced its relationships with all major powers, seeking maximum flexibility and non-alignment. Economic pressures, especially in its eastern provinces like Papua, may also open the door to Russian investment in exchange for military cooperation.
However, Jakarta must tread carefully. In 2024, Indonesia signed a new defense cooperation agreement with Australia, signaling deeper ties. Any deal with Russia that jeopardizes this partnership would risk strategic and economic fallout.
Papua New Guinea: A Silent Stakeholder
Just 500 kilometers from Biak lies Papua New Guinea (PNG)—a relatively quiet but crucial actor in this drama. PNG has been deepening ties with Australia and the U.S., including a 2023 defense agreement that grants American forces access to its bases.
PNG’s military, modest at just 3,600 personnel, relies heavily on Australian and U.S. support. Australia donated Guardian-class patrol boats, and joint exercises are routine. A Russian presence in Biak could alter PNG’s security landscape and force it into difficult choices.
It could also strain U.S. basing agreements, which rely on uncontested air and sea corridors. Washington may respond by strengthening its footprint in PNG and fast-tracking upgrades to bases used by American forces.
One of the most intriguing aspects of this episode is how it unfolded. The story broke not via a government leak or satellite imagery, but through Janes and open-source intelligence (OSINT) networks like OSINTdefender.
These platforms, while valuable, are not immune to disinformation. Was this a genuine leak? A misinterpreted document? Or a deliberate information operation designed to rattle Western allies?
Russia has a history of using information warfare to sow confusion. In 2017, its brief bomber deployment to Biak captured global headlines but led to no lasting presence. A similar playbook could be in motion here—raise alarms, observe reactions, and extract geopolitical value without firing a shot.
For the United States, this episode is more than just an intelligence hiccup. A Russian foothold in Indonesia—however symbolic—would disrupt military planning and potentially stretch U.S. resources.
Already, the U.S. is investing in upgrades to Australian airbases, expanding troop rotations, and signing agreements with Pacific nations to counter Chinese expansion. A Russian move into Biak would force recalibration—diverting attention and assets.
And that might be the point.
Even a single Russian aircraft deployed to Biak, backed by the perception of intent, would represent an asymmetric win for Moscow. It would cost little, but complicate Western strategy in a region critical to global security.
AUKUS, China, and the Indo-Pacific Chessboard
The deeper concern is the evolving Indo-Pacific chessboard. The AUKUS pact, signed in 2021 and expanded since, was designed to counter China’s rise—but it now faces pressure from both Beijing and Moscow.
China continues its naval buildup, flying reconnaissance sorties and deploying advanced vessels like the Type 055 destroyer in contested waters. A Russian presence, however limited, would give China a strategic ally on a second front.
Moscow and Beijing have already conducted joint patrols, including a 2023 bomber mission near Alaska. Coordinated action in the Indo-Pacific would be a powerful signal—and a major headache for the U.S. and its allies.
Whether Russia truly requested access to Biak or merely floated the idea, the impact is real. It exposed diplomatic fissures, tested alliances, and showcased how even rumors can become strategic tools.
For Indonesia, this is a delicate balancing act. For Australia and the U.S., it’s a reminder that no theater can be taken for granted. And for Russia, it’s a masterclass in geopolitical messaging—one that required no deployment, no dollars, just a few words in the right place.
In an era of multipolar competition and strategic ambiguity, even unverified reports can shift calculations. That may be the most important lesson of all.
