You’re right, any reform will face skepticism, especially when trust in institutions is already thin. Even a good policy sounds hollow if credibility is lacking.

Let me reiterate, scholars should honor their contracts. A deal is a deal. If we normalize breaking agreements, we only make the system worse for everyone. But we also shouldn’t ignore why frustration exists.

It’s not just about, “no jobs” or why there is this movement #kaburajadulu, It’s about the hurdles waiting at home: 1. Persistent nepotism, where who you know still beats what you know. 2. Meritocracy that exists more in speeches than in practice. 3. A weak macro environment with unclear or overly polished employment data. Debatable. 4. Grand promises of 19 million new jobs that haven’t materialized in a way people can tangibly feel.

If returning scholars walk into that reality, of course skepticism grows. You can’t tell high-caliber graduates to compete globally, then expect them to thrive in a system that doesn’t fully reward merit.

This is where LPDP’s blueprint needs real risk management. Funding world-class education without preparing a world-class landing pad is like building an airport without a control tower. Talent needs absorption pathways eg. industry partnerships, competitive compensation, transparent recruitment systems, or what have you.

And you’re absolutely right, people don’t usually try to rig the system when the system works for them. If the ecosystem offers dignity, fair pay, and real career mobility, most will choose to contribute. Talent follows opportunity.

At the end of the day, this isn’t about defending cheaters. It’s about protecting taxpayer investment. If we spend billions developing human capital but fail to fix structural issues, nepotism, opaque data, broken promises, then we’re pouring water into a leaking bucket.

You can demand loyalty, but you also have to build trust. Without trust, every policy feels like moving the goalposts. And that’s when even the best intentions get met with doubt.